IN RE ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS CORP.

Civil Action Nos. 16-888-RGA, 17-9-RGA

IN RE: ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS CORP., et al., Debtor. SHIRLEY FENICLE, et al., Appellants, v. ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS CORP., et al., Appellees. IN RE: ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS CORP., et al., Debtor. SHIRLEY FENICLE, et al., Appellants, v. ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS CORP., et al., Appellees.

United States District Court, D. Delaware.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 0158 Bankruptcy Appeal from Judgment / Order
Nature of Suit: 422 Bankruptcy Appeal (801)
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Shirley Fenicle, Appellant, represented by Daniel K. Hogan , Hogan McDaniel.

Shirley Fenicle, Appellant, represented by Leslie M. Kelleher , Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, pro hac vice.

David William Fahy, Appellant, represented by Daniel K. Hogan , Hogan McDaniel.

John H. Jones, Appellant, represented by Daniel K. Hogan , Hogan McDaniel.

Energy Future Holdings Corp., et al., Appellee, represented by Jason Michael Madron , Richards, Layton & Finger, PA, Daniel J. DeFranceschi , Richards, Layton & Finger, PA, David M. Klauder , Bielli & Klauder, LLC & Mark David Collins , Richards, Layton & Finger, PA.


MEMORANDUM ORDER

BAP No. 16-47.

BAP No. 17-1.

Bankruptcy Case No. 14-10979 (CSS).

Bankruptcy Case No. 14-10979 (CSS).

RICHARD G. ANDREWS, District Judge.

In 16-888, Appellees have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. (D.I. 18). In 17-9, Appellees claim to have eleven issues on appeal. (D.I. 4). Nevertheless, the parties and their attorneys are the same as in 16-888, and, notwithstanding the Hydra-like proliferation of issues, I think the core concern is the same as in 16-888. The confirmation hearing, I am told, is set to begin in a week. (No. 16-888, D.I. 21, iJ 1). I would not want to bet against another appeal ifthe Bankruptcy Court confirms a plan. And, of course, there has already been an earlier appeal, which I dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 2016 WL 5402186 (D.Del. Sept. 26, 2016).

The current approach seems inefficient, as there are not going to be any decisions in the pending appeals before the Bankruptcy Court rules on confirmation. It would seem to me to make more sense to consolidate Nos. 16-888, 17-9, and the likely third appeal, for briefing and argument.

The parties are directed to meet-and-confer, and, no later than February 13, advise of their positions on consolidation. Ideally, the parties could also agree on a briefing schedule, with Appellants' opening brieftied to the Bankruptcy Court's confirmation order, ifthere is one.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases