Alberts, Trustee v. Tuft et al

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
In re
GREATER SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY
HOSPITAL CORP. I, et al.,
Debtors.
____________________________
SAM J. ALBERTS, TRUSTEE FOR
THE DCHC LIQUIDATING TRUST,
Plaintiff,
v.
PAUL TUFT, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 02-02250
(Chapter 11)
(Jointly Administered)
Adversary Proceeding No.
04-10459
Not for Publication in
West’s Bankruptcy Reporter.
MEMORANDUM DECISION REGARDING ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST EPSTEIN BECKER & GREEN, P.C.
On May 2, 2007, the court entered an order granting summary
judgment to the defendant Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. (the
“summary judgment order”) in which the court dismissed all
remaining portions of all remaining counts against the defendant
Epstein Becker and Green, P.C. (“EBG”) in the second amended
complaint, and entered judgment in favor of the EBG. 	The summary
The decision below is signed as a decision of
the court.
Signed: June 18, 2007.
_____________________________
S. Martin Teel, Jr.
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 04-10459 Doc 342 Filed 06/19/07 Entered 06/19/07 09:18:59 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 3

2
judgment order noted that it was not a final appealable judgment
and that a party could file a motion under rule 54(b) to enter a
final appealable judgment as to EBG. 	On May 10, 2007 the
plaintiff filed a motion to vacate the summary judgment order and
to establish a new briefing and discovery schedule. 	On May 25,
2007, the court held a hearing on the motion to vacate. 	Upon the
conclusion of the hearing, the court rendered an oral decision
denying the motion to vacate in all respects. 	Pursuant to that
decision, an order denying the motion to vacate was entered on
June 4, 2007.
EBG has filed a motion for entry of a final appealable
judgment under rule 54(b). 	The motion is unopposed, and after
evaluating the relevant factors under rule 54(b), the court has
determined that there is no just reason for delay in entering a
final appealable judgment in favor of EBG. 	The plaintiff and the
other law firm defendant, Kutak Rock LLP, have filed a
stipulation of dismissal of the adversary proceeding against
Kutak Rock LLP. 	The plaintiff has also indicated that the claims
in this adversary proceeding against the remaining defendants,
certain directors and officers, have been settled with the
settlement papers being drafted. 	In any event, any appeal of the
summary judgment order would appear to involve issues different
from the issues relating to the defendant directors and officers.
There is no evidence that any factors (such as judicial
Case 04-10459 Doc 342 Filed 06/19/07 Entered 06/19/07 09:18:59 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 3

3	O:\Andrew Fausett Temp Docs\Orders\Alberts vs Tuft Jdgt Dismissing Epstein Becker Decision re Making Final.wpd
administrative interest and concern about piecemeal appeals) are
present that would weigh against entry of a final appealable
judgment for EBG. 	Accordingly, the Court expressly directs that
the clerk to enter a final judgment as to EBG. 	That judgment
follows.
[Signed and dated above.]
Copies to: All counsel of record.
Case 04-10459 Doc 342 Filed 06/19/07 Entered 06/19/07 09:18:59 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 3