IN RE ANCILLARY ADVERSARY PROCEEDING QUESTIONS: STATE TREASURER, NANCY FARMER,Appellant's Reply Brief • August 19th, 2002
The trustee does not argue that her notice of hearing on her motion for judgment on the pleadings was timely under Rule 44.01. Instead, she attempts to justify her untimeliness. She explains that, because the Treasurer set her motion to vacate for hearing on October 18, 2001, she noticed her motion for judgment on the pleadings, filed on October 12, 2001, for the previously established date. But the facts, put in context, establish the impropriety of the notice given by the trustee.
IN THEAppellant's Reply Brief • January 28th, 2004
IN THEAppellant's Reply Brief • May 5th, 2020
Receiver argues that Judge Kinder, who disqualified himself immediately after entering the ex parte order creating these proceedings, had no reason to disqualify himself before entering that order. But the reasons for his disqualification were the same before and after his entry of the order.
