- 5 -
participating partners, specifically including participating
partner Milton Chwasky. Rules 246(b), 247, 21(b)(2).
As previously stated, on April 17, 1996, participating
partner Milton Chwasky filed a Motion for Leave to File Motion to
Vacate Decision and lodged a Motion to Vacate Decision with the
Court. Attached to such motion for leave is an affidavit
executed by Milton Chwasky which states that petitioners and the
participating partners failed to respond to the Court's orders
dated May 11, 1994, and August 19, 1994, due to a breakdown in
the lines of communication between Mr. Haydon and Transpac's
accountant, Mr. Bernard J. Pitkoff. Mr. Chwasky's Motion for
Leave to File Motion to Vacate Decision includes an allegation
that respondent does not object to the motion.
This matter was called for hearing in Washington, D.C., on
May 22, 1996. Counsel for respondent appeared at the hearing and
explained that, contrary to representations made to Mr. Haydon
prior to the filing of the Motion for Leave to File Motion to
Vacate Decision, respondent intended to oppose the pending
motion.3 In particular, counsel for respondent asserted that
Milton Chwasky's motion should be denied because the standards
required to support a motion to vacate a final decision had not
been satisfied.
3 Counsel for respondent advised the Court that he notified
Mr. Haydon the day before the hearing that respondent would
oppose Mr. Chwasky's motion at the hearing.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011