Case Activity (1710)

1. Filed: September 30, 2026 | Entered: September 30, 2026 J.P. Morgan Securities LLC et al v. Black et al

   370 Other Fraud | Illinois Northern

   Entered

   ENTERED in Error. (lma, ). (Entered: 09/30/2026)

2. Filed: September 30, 2026 | Entered: September 30, 2026 J.P. Morgan Securities LLC et al v. Black et al

   370 Other Fraud | Illinois Northern

   Minute

   MINUTE entry before the Honorable Andrea R. Wood: Olga Dal's motion to authorize withdrawal of interpleaded assets (Dkt. No. 332 ) is denied. With her motion, Dal asks the Court to authorize the withdrawal of $343,936.93 from the interpleaded assets for the purpose of satisfying a judgment that she obtained in the Circuit Court of Cook County. Dal previously made a similar request in 2021. (Dkt. No. 171 .) The Court denied the prior request for reasons explained in its Memorandum Opinion and Order dated 9/29/2021 (Dkt. No. 197 ). The same reasoning applies to Dal's current request. In determining that it would be premature to authorize the disbursement of interpleaded assets to any claimant, the Court does not in any way impugn the final judgment obtained by Dal in Illinois state court. However, as the Court previously explained, "Dal is not the only party to hold an enforceable final judgment. The purpose of a statutory interpleader action is to provide for an equitable proceeding to reach a just outcome where there are overlapping and conflicting claims to a single res, and to ultimately determine rights to a specific fund. The Court is not yet in a position to make further determinations regarding rights to the Interpleaded Assets." (Dkt. No. 197 at 23 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).) That the Court authorized a withdrawal from the interpleaded assets to pay attorneys' fees and costs incurred by the Interpleader Plaintiff is immaterial to Dal's request. Those funds were withdrawn pursuant to authority permitting a court to exercise its discretion to award attorneys' fees and costs to a stakeholder in an interpleader action "if the costs are determined to be reasonable and the stakeholder's efforts are not part of its normal course of business." Aaron v. Mahl, 550 F.3d 659, 667 (7th Cir. 2008). When a court awards such fees and costs in an interpleader action, they generally come from the stake itself. Id. at 667. Dal's position as an Interpleader Defendant is not comparable to J.P. Morgan's Chase's position as the Interpleader Plaintiff and disinterested stakeholder. Mailed notice (lma, ) (Entered: 09/30/2026)

3. 1708 additional result(s)