United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division
RICHARD MILLS, U.S. District Judge
December 22, 2011, the Court entered Judgment in favor of
Plaintiffs Central Laborers' Pension Fund, et
al. and against Defendant Alliance Concrete
Construction, L.L.C., in the amount of $10, 094.50, as to
Count II, and $370, 028.19, as to Count V.
11, 2014, the Plaintiffs filed a Combined Motion and
Memorandum for a Rule to Show Cause, to Avoid Fraudulent
Conveyances and to Turn Over Assets. See Doc. No.
90. On July 10, 2014, the Court Allowed the Motion and
Ordered Michael Wardlow, as manager of Defendant Alliance
Concrete Construction, L.L.C., to show cause why he should
not be held in contempt for his failure to comply with
Citations to Discover Assets and, further, why he should not
be held personally liable for the value of transferred
assets, for making non-exempt transfers in violation of the
Citation to Discover Assets. See Doc. No. 92.
the July 10, 2014 Opinion and Order, there have been a number
of filings by parties, interested parties and/or non-parties.
before the Court: (1) Plaintiffs' Motion for Turnover
against the FDIC [Doc. No. 132-2]; (2) Plaintiffs' Motion
for Order to Show Cause against Great Southern Bank [Doc. No.
137] and (3) Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss the FDIC's
Counter-Petition for Failure to State a Claim for Declaratory
Relief [Doc. No. 156]. The Court heard oral argument on these
July 10, 2014 Opinion and Order, the Court further stated
that the Motion to Avoid the Alleged Fraudulent Transfers of
Ten Vehicles against non-party Xtreme Caution, Inc. would be
considered at the Show Cause Hearing. The Court also Allowed
the Motion for Turnover and Ordered the turnover to the
Plaintiffs of the proceeds of the sale of the ten vehicles
sold by Valley Bank, to be applied by the Plaintiffs toward
the outstanding judgments. On October 11, 2014, Interested
Party Xtreme Caution, Inc. filed a Response to the Motion for
Order to Show Cause, Avoid Fraudulent Conveyances and Turn
Over Assets. See Doc. No. 112.
September 10, 2014, the Plaintiffs filed a Motion to
Substitute Party, requesting that Valley Bank be replaced as
an interested party by Great Southern Bank. See Doc.
No. 108. In a Text Order entered on September 19, 2014, the
Court Allowed the Motion and Great Southern Bank was added as
an interested party.
October 13, 2014, Counsel entered an appearance on behalf of
the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for
Valley Bank (FDIC). See Doc. No. 114. The FDIC
accepted its appointment as Receiver pursuant to the Federal
Deposit Insurance Act, 12 U.S.C. § 1811 et
seq., on June 20, 2014. See Doc. No. 115-3.
October 13, 2014, the FDIC moved to vacate the July 10, 2014
Order as it pertains to Valley Bank. See Doc. No.
115. The FDIC contended the Court lacked jurisdiction to
grant the Plaintiffs' Motion for Turnover as to Valley
Bank because the Plaintiffs never served Valley Bank with the
Motion. Because the FDIC was appointed as Receiver for Valley
Bank on June 20, 2014, moreover, the Court did not have any
jurisdiction against Valley Bank pursuant to 12 U.S.C. §
1821(d)(13)(D).Accordingly, the FDIC claimed the July 10,
2014 Order was void.
October 15, 2014, the Plaintiffs filed a Response to the
FDIC's Motion. See Doc. No. 117. In their
Response, the Plaintiffs alleged that because they filed a
timely claim and also filed their Motion for Turnover before
the FDIC's appointment as a receiver for Valley Bank, the
Court retained jurisdiction over their Motion for Turnover.
On April 1, 2015, the Court Denied the FDIC's Motion to
Vacate the Order entered on July 10, 2014. See Doc.
October 13, 2014, the FDIC also moved to vacate the September
19, 2014 Order substituting Great Southern Bank for Valley
Bank, on the basis that Valley Bank was never properly served
with the Plaintiffs' Motion for Turnover. See
Doc. No. 116. The FDIC alleged that, pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
§ 1821(c) and (d), it is the proper party to substitute
as Valley Bank's successor by operation of
On April 1, 2015, the Court Denied the Motion to Vacate the
Order entered on September 19, 2014, concluding that Great
Southern Bank is the proper party. See Doc. No.
Great Southern Bank and the FDIC filed Motions to Reconsider
the April 1, 2015 Order on the Motion to Vacate and
Substitute Party. See Doc. Nos. 129 & 130. In an
Order entered on June 19, 2015, the Court Denied both Motions
to Reconsider. See Doc. No. 136. The Court also
Allowed the Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File a Motion
for Turnover against the FDIC, and Ordered that the Motion
for Turnover be docketed. See id.
22, 2015, the Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Order to Show
Cause against Great Southern Bank. See Doc. No. 137.
The basis of the motion is that since the September 19, 2014,
Great Southern Bank has failed to turn over the $106, 000
which its predecessor, Valley Bank, was Ordered to pay on
July 10, 2014.
9, 2015, Great Southern Bank filed a cross-claim for
declaratory relief and supplementary counter-petition for
declaratory relief against the FDIC. See Doc. No.
142. On July 14, 2015, the FDIC, as receiver for Valley Bank,