Case Activity (41929)

1. Filed: July 10, 2026 | Entered: July 10, 2026 Case in other court:

   | New Jersey

   Report And Recommendation

   REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of Special Master re 33006 MOTION in Limine, 33012 MOTION to Exclude. Objections, if any, to R&R due by 7/24/2026. Signed by Special Master Hon. Freda L. Wolfson (ret.) on 7/10/2026. (adc, ) (Entered: 07/10/2026)

2. Order | Filed: July 10, 2026 | Entered: July 10, 2026 McCormick 103, LLC v. Greg Beeche, Logistics, LLC et al

   Negotiable Instrument | New York Northern

   Order on Letter Request Order on Motion to Compel Order on Motion to Stay Order on Motion for Reconsideration

   TEXT ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Defendant Beeche's letter requests, which seek (i) the Court's review of certain actions taken by the Receiver, see Dkt. Nos. 124 , 129 , (ii) a temporary stay of the Receiver's disposition of assets, see Dkt. Nos. 145 , 150 , and (iii) the Court's reconsideration of the Permanent Receivership Order. Dkt. No. 150 . As previously articulated in this Court's Order dated April 24, 2026, see Dkt. No. 120 , and this Court's Memorandum-Decision & Order dated April 3, 2026, see Dkt. No. 96 , the Receiver - not Defendant Beeche - is authorized to manage the assets of the Receivership, and the Receiver's rights and powers to "market, sell or otherwise dispose of the Receivership Assets...supplant any rights or powers of Defendants to hold and manage the Receivership assets." Dkt. No. 63 at para 4(iii), 4(viii). Defendant Beeche again fails to present new facts or circumstances that would justify a departure from the Court's prior determination. Moreover, as the Court has previously noted, Mr. Beeche may not represent the other Defendants, as it is well-established in the Second Circuit that corporate entities cannot appear pro se. See Lattanzio v. COMTA, 481 F.3d 137, 139-40 (2d Cir. 2007). In addition, counsel has appeared on behalf of the Entity Defendants, see Dkt. No. 146 , so to the extent that Mr. Beeche makes arguments on behalf of those Defendants, the Court does not consider them. Accordingly, Defendant's requests are DENIED. Defendant continues to remain in contempt of Court and a coercive fine of $1,000 continues to be imposed for each subsequent business day of non-compliance with this Court's Memorandum-Decision & Order dated April 3, 2026. As a word of caution to Defendant, failure to comply may result in further sanctions, up to and including imprisonment. SO ORDERED by U.S. District Judge Anne M. Nardacci on 7/10/2026. (Copy served upon pro se defendant by regular mail). (mab)

3. 41927 additional result(s)