Case No. 04-00926.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Columbia.
August 31, 2010
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING “EMERGENCY MOTION TO AMEND ORDER TO STRIKE DOCUMENT 353 AS ISSUED ON DECEMBER 16, 2010 [SIC] PURSUANT TO RULE 9011”
S. TEEL JR., Bankruptcy Judge
This addresses the “Emergency Motion to Amend Order to Strike Document 353 As Issued on December 16, 2010 [sic] Pursuant to Rule 9011” filed by James Patrick Doyle on August 12, 2010 (Dkt. No. 438). On December 17, 2009, the court entered an Order Striking Documents (Dkt. No. 368) which struck Doyle’s original Emergency Motion for Writs of Mandamus (Dkt. No. 350), [1] directed
Page 2
against the Secretary of the Interior, and filed on November 17, 2009. In the interim, on November 27, 2009, Doyle had filed an amended version of his Emergency Motion for Writs of Mandamus (Dkt. No. 363). That amended version of the mandamus motion failed to correct the defects in the original mandamus motion that led to the order striking the original mandamus motion, and was implicitly stricken by the order of December 17, 2009.
As this court observed in striking the original mandamus motion, Doyle cannot act on behalf of the debtor in possession. The claims asserted in the original mandamus motion and in the amended version of the mandamus motion included claims that appear to belong exclusively to the debtor, Environmental Land Technology, Ltd. Doyle has no standing to assert those claims: a shareholder’s interest in a corporation does not give that shareholder standing to assert claims of the corporation. Because Doyle is not a member of the bar of the District Court of which this court as a unit, he could not file the mandamus motion in a representative capacity on behalf of the debtor in possession.
Moreover, to the extent that Doyle asserts claims that belong to himself, both versions of the mandamus motion failed to articulate how those claims would have an impact on the administration of the estate such as to confer subject matter jurisdiction on the court under 28 U.S.C. § 1334.
Page 3
Finally, as both the original and amended versions of the mandamus motion recognized, the relief sought by Doyle included relief that ought to be sought by way of an adversary proceeding by reason of Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 7001. Both the original and amended versions were not properly captioned for an adversary proceeding, and the clerk appropriately did not docket either version of the mandamus motion as an adversary proceeding complaint.[2]
The striking of the original mandamus motion (and implicitly of the amended to mandamus motion) was without prejudice to Doyle filing a motion or complaint as to claims that he had standing to pursue in his own right, if, which seems unlikely, he could establish subject matter jurisdiction for entertaining such claims. In accordance with the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the “Emergency Motion to Amend Order to Strike Document 353 As Issued on December 16, 2010 [sic] Pursuant to
Page 4
Rule 9011″ filed by James Patrick Doyle on August 12, 2010 (Dkt. No. 438) is DENIED. It is further
ORDERED that the Emergency Motion for Writs of Mandamus (Dkt. No. 350) filed by Doyle on November 17, 2009, and the amended version of the Emergency Motion for Writs of Mandamus (Dkt. No. 363) filed by Doyle on November 27, 2009, stand stricken.
The document below is hereby signed.
Signed: August 30, 2010.
Emergency Motion for Writs of Mandamus for Immediate Equitable Relief in Compelling the Secretary of Interior to Offer to Purchase or Trade Petitioner’s ELT Land Projects Pursuant to Public Law 104-333(T); Compell [sic] the Secretary of Interior to Admit the Taking of ELT Land Projects in St. George, Utah; in the Alternative, Complaint for Adversary Proceeding, Pursuant to Rule 7001 (Nine), for Declaratory Judgment on the Taking of ELT Land Projects.