Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Shanrie Co.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


December 19, 2007

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SHANRIE COMPANY, DAN SHEILS, NETEMEYER ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC., AND THOUVENOT, WADE & MOERCHEN, INC., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge

ORDER

The Court held a final pre-trial conference today. All parties were present. It came to the Court's attention, following the conclusion of the conference, that there was some confusion regarding if and when additional evidence would be taken on the issue of the remedial plan. The Court reconvened the parties to clarify each parties position on the necessity of such a hearing. The United States argued that it believes the issue has been fully briefed and that no additional evidence or argument is necessary. The Court is inclined to agree. However, in the interest of fairness, the Court would like to give Defendants the opportunity to submit a brief outlining specifically what additional evidence they intend to offer, if the Court were to hold a supplemental hearing on the issue. As the parties are well aware, the Court has already determined that Defendants Shanrie Company, Dan Sheils, and Netemeyer Engineering Associates, Inc. are liable for the Fair Housing Act violations at Applegate Apartments. The only remaining question at this point is what the appropriate remedy should be. If Defendants merely intend to make additional arguments as to why they should not be required to remedy certain violations, a hearing would not be appropriate. Defendants were given ample opportunity to present a remedial plan that they believed was appropriate and to include arguments, as they did, as to why a certain approach should be adopted over another approach. The Court sees no reason to draw this process out any longer than necessary. Therefore, Defendants have until January 7, 2008 to submit a brief no longer than 10 pages detailing what evidence they intend to offer, if a supplemental hearing were held. The United States shall submit a response no later than January 14, 2008. In addition, both parties should address the newly raised issues regarding Buildings 7 and 8.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

David R Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court

20071219

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.