This case involved an appeal from a bankruptcy court's decision in an adversary proceeding where creditor Stephen Showalter sought to deny debtor Stephen Todd Stevens a discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2), alleging that Stevens had concealed or transferred assets to hinder creditors within a year before filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. The bankruptcy court denied the discharge after trial, finding that Stevens had taken steps to remove property from creditors' reach. On appeal, the district court affirmed, holding that Stevens waived any challenge to the complaint's pleading sufficiency under Twombly and Iqbal by filing an untimely Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss after answering and proceeding through discovery and trial without renewing the objection.
The case was an appeal and cross-appeal from a U.S. Bankruptcy Court decision following a nine-day trial in the USGen New England, Inc. bankruptcy proceeding, concerning TransCanada Pipelines Ltd.'s claim for damages arising from USGen's breach of a contract for natural gas pipeline capacity on TransCanada's Mainline system. The district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's decision in full, upholding its findings on the amount of damages, the adequacy of TransCanada's mitigation efforts through re-auctioning capacity and other means, and the treatment of the claim under the Bankruptcy Code. The court reasoned that the bankruptcy court's factual determinations were supported by the record, including evidence that TransCanada met its duty of prudence under Canadian regulatory requirements, that certain bids did not qualify as mitigation, and that discounting the claim to present value was not required.
The case involved the Small Business Administration (SBA) filing a complaint against ECC Partners, L.P., an SBA-licensed Small Business Investment Company, alleging violations of capital requirements under the Small Business Investment Act and related regulations after the company developed a capital impairment condition exceeding permitted levels. The SBA sought and obtained a consent order appointing it as receiver to manage and liquidate the company's assets. The receiver later submitted a recommended disposition of claims, which the court approved, leading ECentury Capital Corporation, the former management company, to file an opposition. Following oral argument, the court confirmed the receiver's recommended disposition of claims and denied ECentury's motion, enforcing the regulatory restrictions and the terms of the consent order regarding asset handling and claim payments.
This case concerned the validity of an arbitration award resolving a collective bargaining impasse between the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) and Local 689 of the Amalgamated Transit Union over wages and pensions for the 2008-2012 period. After an initial round of summary judgment motions, the court remanded the matter to the arbitration board for a supplemental opinion demonstrating compliance with the National Capital Area Interest Arbitration Standards Act, which requires consideration of specific factors including the public welfare and the financial ability of participating jurisdictions. Upon review of the board's Second Supplemental Opinion and the full record, the court denied WMATA's renewed motion for summary judgment and to disqualify board members, granted the Union's motion to confirm the award, and confirmed the remaining portions of the arbitration decision. The core reasoning was that the board had adequately addressed the statutory factors as required by the Act and prior court guidance, leaving no basis to vacate the award under the limited standards for reviewing labor arbitration decisions.
The case involved claims by the mother and girlfriend of Gregory Boggs, Jr., who was fatally shot by Prince George's County police officer Jordan Swonger in 2006 while Swonger responded to reports of an assault. Plaintiffs brought multiple counts against the officer, including excessive force under the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, wrongful death, survival act, and violations of the Maryland Constitution. After a mistrial due to a hung jury, the court granted the officer's renewed motion for summary judgment on all remaining counts. The court reasoned that the officer's single shot was objectively reasonable because he reasonably perceived an imminent threat when Boggs, while restraining the victim, suddenly reached behind his back for what appeared to be a weapon, justifying the use of deadly force under the circumstances.
Steven Syrja sued his former employer Westat, Inc., alleging violations of the FLSA and other laws, and moved for conditional class certification of a collective action under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) on behalf of current and former field interviewers denied overtime pay for hours over 40 in a workweek. The court denied the motion for conditional class certification. The decision rested on findings that field interviewers largely set their own schedules, received varying work assignments depending on location and manager preferences, and were responsible for reporting their own hours, with no evidence of a company-wide policy or knowledge by higher management of uncompensated overtime. These factors meant that individualized inquiries would predominate over common questions, rendering a collective action inappropriate.
