2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 1-27-2010 

# P l a s t ip ak P kg Inc v

. F rede rick D eP a squale P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 09-1683

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" P l as t ip ak P kg Inc v

. F r e de rick D eP as quale " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 2004. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/2004NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT
N o. 09- 1683
P L A S T IP A K P A C K A G IN G , IN C ., A ppel l ant

v. F R E D E R IC K P E T E R D E P A S Q U A L E ; M A R K J. D E P A S Q U A L E ; CA RL B. DEPA SQU ALE; M AR I O C . DEPA SQU ALE,

APP EAL F ROM THE UNI TE D ST ATE S DI S TRI CT C OURT F O R T H E W E S T E R N D IS T R IC T O F P E N N S Y L V A N IA

( D . C . C i vi l N o. 99- cv- 00245) D istri ct Ju d g e: H o n o rab le T erren ce F . M cV erry Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J anuary12, 2010
B efor e: SC I R I C A , C hi ef J udge, B A R R Y and SM I T H , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on Fi l ed: J anuary27, 2010)

OP I NI ON

B A R R Y , C i r cui tJ udge Pl as t i pak Packa gi ng, I nc. ( “Pl as t i pak”) , a manufactur erof pl as t i c cont ai ner s , hasFr om t he ea r l y1980s unt i l s om et i m e i n 1995, M ac- J am and Pl as t i pak had a n 1 o n g o in g b u s in e s s re la tio n s h ip in w h ic h P la s tip a k s u p p lie d M a c -J a m w ith p la s tic b o ttle s . I n D ece m berof 1995, Pl as t i pak fi l ed a l aw s ui tagai ns tM ac- J am al l egi ng br eac h of c o n tra c t. T he mer i t s of the ac t i on befor e us , w hi ch w er e dec i ded bya j uryei ghty ear s ago, 2 r evol ved ar ound w hetherM ac- J am w as M r . D ePas qual e’ s al t erego, and w hetherhe had engage d i n t he fr audul entt r ans ferof pr oper t yunderthe Penns y l vani a U ni form Fr audul ent T ran sfe r A ct (“P U F T A ”), 12 P a. C o n s. S tat . § § 5 1 0 5 -51 1 0 . O n D ec em b er 7 , 2 0 0 1 , a jury found thatM ac- J am w as hi s al t er - ego, and j udgm entw as ent er ed aga i ns thi m i n t he a m o u n t o f

$ 7 6 7 ,3 9 3 .6 2 . T h e ju ry f o u n d in h is f

a v o r o n th e f

ra u d u le n t tr a n s f

e r c o u n t. 4 2 P a . C o n s. S tat. § 8 1 2 4 (c ) p ro v id e s th a t: 3 I ns ur ance pr ocee ds . - T he fol l ow i ng pr oper t yorot herr i ght s of the j udgm ent d e b to r sh a ll b e e x e m p t f ro m a ttac h m e n t o r e x e c u tio n o n a ju d g m e n t:

-2- been s eeki ng paym ents i nce 1995 f orpl as t i c bot t l es i tm anufa ctur ed forM ac- J am, I nc. d/b/ a R egentB ot t l i ng C o. ( “M ac- J am”) , a s oftdr i nk bot t l er . I n Februaryof 1999, 1 P las tip a k o b tain e d a ju d g m e n t ag a in st M a c -Ja m . In a n e f f o rt to c o llec t o n th a t ju d g m e n t, P las tip a k f

iled a n a c tio n a g a in st M a c -Ja m ' s s o le s h a re h o ld e r, F re d e ric k P . D e P a sq u a le ( “M r . D ePas qual e, ” t ogetherw i t h hi s non- par t yw i fe, the “D ePas qual es ”) , and w on a $767, 393. 62 j udgm entagai ns tM r . D ePas qual e i n 2001. Pl as t i pak now s eeks t o s at i s fy 2 the j udgm entbyexec ut i ng on cert ai n m oney s ( t he “M oney s ”) w hi ch the D ePas qual es r ece nt l yt r ans ferr ed fr om t hei rj oi ntbank ac count( t he “Bank A ccount ”) t o a l i fe in s u ra n c e p o lic y(t h e “ P o lic y ” ) o w n e d b yM r. D e P a s q u a le f o r t h e b e n e f

it o f h is w if e . T h e f irst iss u e o n a p p e a l is w h e th e r th e D istric t C o u rt e rre d in re f u sin g to p e rm it Pl as t i pak t o exec ut e on the Pol i cy , w hi ch i s pr ot ect ed fr om M r . D ePas qual e’ s cr edi t or s by P e n n sy lv a n ia’ s e x e m p tio n sta tu te, 4 2 P a . C o n s. S tat. § 8 1 2 4 . T h e se c o n d iss u e is 3. . . .

( 6) T he netamount pay abl e underanyannui t ycontr actorpol i cyof l i fe i ns ur ance m ade f

ort he bene fi tof oras s i gned t o t he s pous e, chi l dr en or depende ntr el at i ve of the i ns ur ed, w hetherornotthe r i ghtt o change the named benefi ci aryi s r es erved byorperm i t t ed t o t he i ns ur ed. T he pr ece di ng s ent ence s hal l notbe appl i cabl e t o t he ext entthe j udgm entdebt ori s s uch s p o u s e , c h ild o r o th e r r e la tiv e . T h e m o st i m p o rt an t of sev era l fl aw s in P last ipak ’s th eo ry(w h ich it w ishe s to e x p lore 4 w i th fur therdi s covery ) i s t hateven i f M r . D ePas qual e fr audul ent l ytr ans ferr ed the M o n e y s to th e P o licy , the M o n e y s a re n o w sa f e a n d u n re a c h a b le, a n d P las tip a k se e m s to h a v e n o b a s i s t o r e c o v e rt h e m e i t h e ri n l a w o ri n e q u i t y. -3- w h e th e r t h e C o u rt a b u s e d its d is c re tio n in re f u s in g to a llo w a d d itio n a l d is c o v e ry, i.e ., r efus i ng t o al l ow Pl as t i pak t o depos e the D ePas qual es i n hopes of fi ndi ng evi dence that the D ePas qual es , al bei ti nexpl i cabl y , i nt ended t o t erm i nat e thei rt enanc ybythe ent i r et i es i n the M oney s i n t he B ank A ccountpr i ort o t r ans ferr i ng the M oney s t o t he Pol i cy( and there b yex p o sing M r. D eP asq u ale to li ab il ityfo r frau d u lent tr an sfe r). 4 I . J ur i s di ct i on & St andar d of R evi ew T he D i s t r i ctC our thad j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1332. W e have juri sd ict ion u n d er 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e re v iew the f ac tual fin d ing s o f th e D istri ct C o u rt f o rc l e a re r r o r ; t h e l e g a l c o n c l u s i o n s a r e s u b j e c tt o p l e n a r yr e v i e w. D el
. R i ver& Bay A uth. v. Kopacz , 584 F. 3d 622, 626 n. 5 ( 3d C i r . 2009) . “A di s t r i ctcour t ’ s deni al of di s coveryi s r evi ew ed forabus e of di s cr et i on. ” L eB oo n v. L an cast er Jew ish C m t y. C tr. A ss’n , 5 0 3 F .3 d 2 1 7 , 2 3 5 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 7 ). I I . D i s cus s i on Pl as t i pak i s as ki ng fores s ent i al l ythe s ame equi t abl e r el i ef w hi ch w e al r eadyI n thatappea l , M r . D ePas qual e appe al ed ce r t ai n evi dent i aryand otherrul i ngs , and 5 Pl as t i pak cr os s - appea l ed the D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s deci s i on pr ot ect i ng cert ai n funds hel d i n the s a m e P o lic yn o w a t is s u e b e f o re u s . -4- c o n sid e re d a n d d e n ied in P las tip a k ’s f irst a p p e a l b e f

o re u s, in th is v e rysa m e a c tio n , in 2 0 0 3 . S e e P la stip a k

P a c ka g in g, In c . v. D e P a sq u a le , 7 5 F ed . A p p x . 8 6 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). 5 I n i t s f i r s ta p p e a l b e f

o r e u s , P l a s t i p a k a r g u e d f o ra c c e s s t o c e r t a i n f

u n d s i n th e s a me Pol i cyon equi t abl e gr ounds , i n t he form of the “j udi ci al es t oppel ” r emedy . W e r ej ect ed Pl as t i pak’ s ar gum ent s beca us e, des pi t e the al l egat i ons of fr audul enttr ans fer , j udi ci al
es t oppel “w oul d puni s h t he i nt er es t s of an i nnocentthi r d par t y , D ePas qual e’ s w i fe, ” w ho
w a s th e P o lic y ’s b e n e f

ic ia ry. Id . at94 n. 9 ( ci t i ng Montr os e Med. G r oup P ar t i ci pat i ng Savs
. P lan v. B ul

ger , 2 4 3 F .3 d 7 7 3 , 7 7 8 (3 d C ir .2 0 0 1 ) ( w e in c o rr e c tly c ite d to p a g e 7 7 7 )) . A . E xecut i on on t he Pol i cy Pl as t i pak now ar gues t hatt he M oney s i n t he Pol i cycan be r eac hed vi a another equ i t able r em edy : a con struct i ve trust . H ow ever, ou r consi derat i on of w hethert o im po se a c o n stru c tiv e tru st re q u ire s th a t w e b a lan c e th e sa m e e q u iti e s th a t w e c o n sid e re d in P la s tip a k ’s e a rl ie r r e q u e s t f o r j u d ic ia l e s to p p e l. See J anus M gm t . Ser vs . , I

nc. v. Schl es s i nger , 810 A . 2d 637, 642 ( Pa. Super . 2002) . I ti s , t o s aythe l eas t , di s turbi ng t hat th e p a rt ie s h a v e n o t e v e n m e n tio n e d th is in th e irb ri e f s . T he equi t abl e fa ct or s w ei ghi ng agai ns tal l ow i ng Pl as t i pak t o r eac h t he funds i n t he P o li cyh av e n o t cha n g ed . M rs. D eP asq u ale rem ains the b en ef ici aryo f th e P o li cy . M r. D eP asquale i s accused n ow , as befo re, of m i susi ng the P oli cyt o h i de asset s. R egardl essPl as t i pak ci t es t w o fac tual l ydi s s i m i l arcas es forthe pr opos i t i on thata cons t ruct i ve 6 tru st is a p p ro p ria te h e re : F i del i t y Tr us tC o. v. U

ni on N at i onalB ank of

P i t t s bur gh , 1 6 9 A. 209 ( Pa. 1933) and N

a g le v . N a g le , 7 9 9 A . 2 d 8 1 2 (P a. S u p er. 20 0 2 ). T h o se c ase s are s i m pl yi nappl i cabl e undert he ci r cumst ance s her e, and w e r ej ectthem w i t houtfur t her d is c u s s io n . S e c tio n 8 1 2 4 s p e c if

ic a lly p ro v id e s e x c e p tio n s to o th e r e x e m p tio n s . 4 2 P a .C .S . § 7 8 1 2 4 . F o r ex am p le, the e x em p ti o n fo r ce rt ain re ti rem en t fu n d s, u n d er § 8 1 2 4 (b)(1 )(i x ), i nc l ud e s a n e xc e pt i on fo r“ [a ] mount s de e med t o b e fr a ud ul e ntc on ve y a nc e s . ” 42 Pa . C. S. § 8 1 2 4 (b)(1 )(i x ). T h e ins u ran ce ex em p ti o n ap p li ca b le i n the c ase b ef o re u s, at § 8 1 2 4 (c), cont ai ns no s uch exc ept i on. 42 Pa. C . S. § 8124. -5- of w hetherourear l i errul i ng i s r el evantunderequi t abl e orj udi ci al es t oppel oras the l aw of the ca s e, i ti s appr opr i at e t o aff i r m . T he D ePas qual es ’ i nt ent i ons , vi s - à- vi s w hether 6 the M oney s i n t he B ank A ccountw er e hel d i n a t enanc ybythe ent i r et i es , ar e i r r el evant b e c a u s e th e M o n e y s a re n o w s a f e ly in th e P o lic y . M o re o v e r, a s w e e x p la in e d in th e p ri o r a p p e a l, th e P o lic yis a ls o p ro te c te d b yla w . T he pl ai n l anguage of the Penns y l vani a exe m pt i on s t atut e, 42 Pa. C . S. § 8124, m akes cl ear th a t , r e g a r d l e s s o f

t h e s u b j e c t i v e i n t e n to f

M r . D e P a s q u a l e w h e n h e t o o k o u tth e P o l i c y, the funds ar e s afe fr om hi s cr edi t or s . Pl as t i pak has offe r ed nei t herar gum ent s norany 7
cas e thateven s ugges t s t hatPenns y l vani a l aw al l ow s cr edi t or s t o acc es s ot herw i s ep ro te c te d a s s e ts o n p ro o f o f th e d e b to r’ s s u b

je c tiv e in te n t. In a n ye v e n t, th e f

a c tu a l f in d in g s o f

th e D is tr ic t C o u rt a re n o t c le a rl ye rr o n e o u s . T he r ecor d s uppor t s t he C our t ’ s fi ndi ng thatther e i s notcl earand convi nci ng evi dence thatthe D ePas qual es i nt ended t o s everthe t enanc ybythe ent i r et i es w i t h r es pectt o t he M o n e y s . See J

ohns on v. Johns on , 908 A . 2d 290, 296 ( Pa. Super . 2006) ( not i ng thatT h e is s u e is ra re ly d is c u s s e d (t h e le a d in g c a s e w a s d e c id e d in 1 9 3 9 ). Se e C. I
. T. 8 C or p. v. F l i nt , 5 A . 2d 126, 129 ( Pa. 1939) ( cr edi t or s coul d notchal l enge a tr ans act i on w hi ch s pous es engage d i n fort he admi t t ed purpos e of pr event i ng hus band fr om becomi ng the ow nerbys ur vi vor s hi p) . I n anyevent , as a mat t erof l ogi c, i ti s unl i kel ythatthe D ePas qual es coul d r eas onabl ybe ac cus ed of tr y i ng t o hi ndercr edi t or s bytr ans ferr i ng t he M on ey s fr om on e prot ect ed asset(the B ank A ccou nt, held i n a tenancybythe en t i ret i es) to an o ther (the P o li cy ). A d d ressing this i ssu e, P last ipak o ff ers o n lythe c o n clus o ry s t at ementt hat , even i f the M oney s w er e hel d i n a t enanc ybythe ent i r et i es pr i ort o bei ng tr ans ferr ed t o t he Pol i cy , t her e w as s t i l l a fr audul enttr ans ferbeca us e the B ank A ccount “had be en dee m ed t o be s ubj ectt o exec ut i on. ” ( Pl as t i pak B r . at29. ) Pl as t i pak ci t es no cas es i n s uppor tof thi s pr opos i t i on, and, r egar dl es s , t o s aythatthe B ank A ccounthad b e e n “ d e e m e d to b e s u b je c t to e x e c u tio n ” is m is le a d in g . (Id .) In 2 0 0 4 , a P e n n sy lv a n ia tr i al cour tr efus ed t o s us t ai n obj ect i ons t o a w r i tof exe cut i on on cert ai n funds hel d i n the B a n k A c c o u n t w h ic h th e c o u rt f o u n d w e re n o t h e ld in a te n a n c yb yth e e n tir e tie s . See P la stip a k

P a c ka g in g, In c . v. D eP a sq u a le , G D N o. 03- 19032 ( C t . C om . Pl . , A l l egheny C o u n ty , C iv . D iv . A u g u st 3 , 2 0 0 4 ). H o w e v e r, an o th e r P e n n sy lv a n ia tria l co u rt late r h e ld thatthe B ank A ccountw as nots ubj ectt o exec ut i on vi s - à- vi s cert ai n funds aw ar ded t o the D ePas qual es i n a s epar at e l aw s ui tbeca us e thos e funds w er e aw ar ded t o t he D ePas qual es jo in tly. S e e P la stip a k

P a c ka g in g, In c . v. D e P a sq u a le , G D N o . 0 3 -1 9 0 3 2 (C t. C o m . P l., A l l eghenyC ount y , C i v. D i v. N ov. 30, 2006) . Si m i l ar l y , the M oney s ati s s ue her e, w hi ch w er e aw ar ded t o t he D ePas qual es j oi nt l yaft eran arbi t r at i on pr ocee di ng, w er e neve r s u b je c t to e x e c u tio n w h e n th e yw e re o n d e p o s it in th e B a n k A c c o u n t. -6- Penns y l vani a l aw cr eat es a r ebutt abl e pr es um pt i on thatpr oper t yi s hel d i n t enanc ybyt he ent i r et i es , w hi ch maybe over come bycl earand convi nci ng evi dence ) . T he C our tfound thatthe M oney s w er e s o- hel d unt i l the mom enttheyw er e tr ans ferr ed t o t he Pol i cy . T he M o n ey s w ere n ev er a cc essib le t o P last ipak an d w ere n ev er in M r. D eP asq u ale’s i ndi vi dual contr ol , and s o coul d nothave be en fr audul ent l ytr ans ferr ed. 8 B . T he D i s coveryI s s ue T he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d notabus e i t s di s cr et i on i n r efus i ng t o al l ow addi t i onal d isc o v e ry , an d , in p a rticu lar , the d e p o sitio n s o f th e D e P a sq u a les . P las tip a k a rg u e s th a t itP las tip a k a rg u e s th a t “th e [ D ]istric t [ C ]o u rt d e n ied P las tip a k ’s d isc o v e ryre q u e sts 9 onl y beca us e theyw er e s uppos edl yunt i m el y . ” ( Pl as t i pak B r . at23) . W e di s agr ee. -7- is e n tit led to a n o p p o rtu n ityto d e p o se th e D e P a sq u a les in o rd e r to c o n f irm its th e o ryth a t,
a t so m e p o in t, th e D e P a sq u a les d e c id e d to se v e r th e ir ten a n c yb yth e e n tiretie s o f c e rta in fu n d s in the B an k A cc o u n t, there b yren d ering tho se f u n d s v u lnera b le t o att ac h m en t. If the D ePas qual es t r ans ferr ed the M oney s w hi l e the M oney s w er e hel d i n t enanc ybythe
e n tir e tie s , th e D e P a s q u a le s a re n o t s u b je c t to lia b ility f

o r f ra u d u le n t tr a n s f

e r. Se e C. I

. T. C or p. , 5 A . 2d at129. O n t he otherhand, i f the t enanc ybythe ent i r et i es w as s ever ed befor e the M oney s w er e tr ans ferr ed t o t he Pol i cy , then M r . D ePas qual e al one tr ans ferr ed th e M o n e y s to th e P o lic ya n d M r. D e P a s q u a le c o u ld b e lia b le f o r f ra u d u le n t tr a n s f

e r. T he D i s t r i ctC our tdeni ed the di s coveryr eques tas unt i m el yand bec aus e, “gi ven the l i t i gi ous hi s t or yof thes e part i es , i ti s unl i kel ythatfur t herdi s covery , br i efi ng and an evi dent i aryhear i ng w oul d be cons i s t entw i t h t he j us t , s peedy , and i nexpens i ve det erm i nat i on of thi s act i on. ” P la stip a k P a c ka g in g, In c . v. D e P a sq u a le , N o. 99- cv- 245, 2009 W L 186139, at*2 ( W . D . Pa. J an. 27, 2009) . I tappea r s thatthe C our tm ayhave 9 b e e n in c o rre c t in c o n c lu d in g th a t P las tip a k ’s r e q u e sts w e re u n tim e ly , b u t th e C o u rt su re ly d id n o t e rr , m u c h le s s a b u s e its d is c re tio n , in re f u s in g to a llo w a d d itio n a l d is c o v e ry. Fi r s t , w e di s cour age “ fi s hi ng expedi t i ons . ” See Ranke v
. Sanof i
- Synthelabo I

nc. , 4 3 6 F .3 d 1 9 7 , 2 0 4 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 6 ). P las tip a k ’s p ro p o sa l to d e p o se th e D e P a sq u a les in h o p es th at i t w il l fi n d a leg al th eo ryb yw h ich it cou ld attach M r. P asq u ale’s as sets b ea rsA s t he D i s t r i ctC our texpl ai ned, i n i t s opi ni on deny i ng Pl as t i pak’ s m ot i on for 10 re c o n sid e ra tio n : [T]he r e w as no bas i s t o concl ude thatM r s . D ePas qual e eve ract ed t o s ever the ent i r et i es ow ner s hi p. T he pr ocee ds ati s s ue w er e: ( 1) i n t he form of a chec k m ade outt o M r s . D ePas qual e; ( 2) depos i t ed i nt o a j oi ntchec ki ng accou nt; and (3) sentt o P enn M utual t o rest ore the v al ue o f M rs . D eP asquale' s i nter estas a death bene fi ci ary . P l ast i pak ’s argum ent that these pr ocee ds s om ehow beca m e the s ol e pr oper t yof M r . D ePas qual e bor der s on the f ri v o lou s. T h e C o u rtad h ere s to the an aly sis i n the J an u ary2 9 O rde r. P la stip a k

P a c ka g in g, In c . v. D eP a sq u a le , N o. 99- cv–245, 2009 W L 501888, at*2 (W . D . P a. F eb rua ry2 7 , 2 0 0 9 ). -8- al l t he hal l m arks of a f

i s hi ng expedi t i on, part i cul ar l ygi ven thatther e i s no evi dence t hat the D ePas qual es i nt ended t o s everthei rt enanc ybythe ent i r et i es . I ndeed, w e have no m or e r eas on t han di d t he D i s t r i ctC our tt o bel i eve thatthe D ePas qual es i nt ended t o do
s o. Pl as t i pak' s ar gum entt hatM r . D ePas qual e evi nced hi s i nt entt o s everbyw r i t i ng a 10 chec k t o the Pol i cyi s unavai l i ng. Pl as t i pak off er s no s uppor tforthe pr opos i t i on thatan inten ti o n to se p ara te pro p ertyin the fu ture se v ers the tena n cyin the p rese n t. M o reo v er, Penns y l vani a l aw i s cl eart hatbot h par t i es
— notj us tone— m us ti nt end t o s evera t enanc y b yth e e n tir e tie s . C l i nger m an v. Sadow s ki , 5 1 9 A . 2 d 3 7 8 (P a. 19 8 6 ). Fi nal l y , Pl as t i pak ar gues t hati f the D ePas qual es s ever ed thei rt enanc ybythe ent i r et i es , t hen M r . D ePas qual e coul d be l i abl e forfr audul enttr ans ferunder P en n sy lvan ia’s frau d u lent co n v ey an ce s statute, 1 2 P a. C o n s. S tat . § 5 1 0 4 . H o w ev er, P las tip a k h a s f

a iled to sh o w h o w M r. D e P a sq u a le’ s a lleg e d f ra u d u len t tran sf

e r w o u ld change the fa ctt hatt he M oney s ar e now s afe l youtof r eac h, and thatPl as t i pak has no re m e d ya t law o r, u n d e r th e c irc u m sta n c e s, in e q u ity , b yw h ich it ca n re a c h th e M o n e y s in-9-

the Pol i cy . Pl as t i pak’ s r epea t ed conc l us orys t at ement s abouthow the ca s e turns on t he in te n t o f th e D e P a s q u a le s a re n o t p e rs u a s iv e . I V . C oncl us i on W e w ill a f

f ir m th e o rd e r o f

th e D is tr ic t C o u rt .