Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago v. Bayou Management, LLC

429 F. Supp. 2d 1374
CourtUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
DecidedApril 18, 2006
DocketNo. 1755
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 429 F. Supp. 2d 1374 (Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago v. Bayou Management, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago v. Bayou Management, LLC, 429 F. Supp. 2d 1374 (jpml 2006).

Opinion

TRANSFER ORDER

D. LOWELL JENSEN, Acting Chairman.

This litigation currently consists of two actions in the District of Connecticut and one action each in the Southern District of Indiana and the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs in one of the District of Connecticut actions move the Panel, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, for an order centralizing this litigation in the District of Connecticut. Plaintiff in the Southern District of Indiana action, DePauw University (DePauw), opposes centralization. One group of defendants1 in two of the four actions opposes centralization for the sole purpose of objecting to jurisdiction and venue for trial at any situs other than the Southern District of New York, but these defendants otherwise have no objection to plaintiffs’ motion for transfer.

On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, the Panel finds that these four actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization under Section 1407 in the Southern District of New York will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. These actions share allegations concerning allegedly fraudulent activity in the operation of one or more Bayou investment funds.2 Centralization under Section 1407 [1376]*1376is necessary in order to eliminate duplica-tive discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel and the judiciary.

DePauw argues in opposition to centralization that resolution of its action will depend on facts not present in the other actions, like the specific advice given to DePauw by the Hennessee defendants regarding DePauw’s investment in the Bayou hedge funds, and that centralization is therefore unnecessary. We disagree. The alleged improprieties regarding the Bayou hedge funds forms the factual backdrop to all actions presently before the Panel. Moreover, the Hennessee defendants are named in two of the four actions. Transfer under Section 1407 will offer the benefit of placing all actions in this docket before a single judge who can structure pretrial proceedings to accommodate all parties’ legitimate discovery needs while ensuring that the common parties and witnesses are not subjected to discovery demands that duplicate activity that will occur or has occurred in other actions. Discovery with respect to any case-specific issues can also proceed concurrently with discovery on common issues. In re Smith Patent Litigation, 407 F.Supp. 1403, 1404 (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit.1976).

We conclude that the Southern District of New York is an appropriate transferee forum for this litigation. Three government civil actions3 regarding the Bayou hedge funds are currently pending there, as well as the criminal proceedings against Israel and Marino. By centralizing this litigation before Judge Colleen McMahon, who presides over those five government matters and the New York action before the Panel, we are assigning this litigation to a jurist who is familiar with the litigation and has the experience necessary to steer this litigation on a prudent course.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, the actions pending outside the Southern District of New York are transferred to the Southern District of New York and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Colleen McMahon for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the action pending in that district.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Bayou Hedge Funds Investment Litigation
429 F. Supp. 2d 1374 (Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
429 F. Supp. 2d 1374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jewish-federation-of-metropolitan-chicago-v-bayou-management-llc-jpml-2006.