United States District Court, E.D. New York
In re EMS FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Debtor.
Federal Insurance Company, White Lines Com, LLC, Bruce Pollak and
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Kirschenbaum & Kirschenbaum, P.C., By: Steven B. Sheinwald, Esq., of Counsel, Garden City, NY, for the Plaintiff.
Tressler LLP, By: Courtney Elizabeth Scott, Esq., John Collen, Esq., Mark D. Conzelmann, Esq., of Counsel, New York, NY, for the Defendant One Penn Plaza.
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
SPATT, District Judge.
On March 6, 2012, the Debtor EMS Financial Services, LLC (" EMS" ) filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the Eastern District of New York before United States Bankruptcy Judge Alan S. Trust. On May 30, 2012, the Plaintiff Kenneth Kirschenbaum, Esq., the Chapter 7 Trustee for EMS (" the Trustee" ), filed an adversary proceeding against the Defendant Federal Insurance Company (" Federal" ), seeking a declaration of the rights, duties, and liabilities of the parties under certain insurance policies. On August 7, 2012, Federal moved this Court to withdraw the adversary proceeding. Federal argues that this is a non-core proceeding that absent withdrawal, will require a costly and inefficient double trial because the bankruptcy court lacks constitutional authority to adjudicate the matter. For the reasons set forth below, Federal's motion to withdraw the reference is granted.
A. The Policy
On or about January 5, 2011, an insurance policy was issued to EMS by Federal under Policy Number 8223-2057 (the " Policy" ). The Policy covered a one year period, from December 27, 2010 through December 27, 2011 (the " Policy Period" ). The Policy was an errors and omissions policy, under which EMS and its officers, directors, and employees were insured for any loss resulting from a claim for wrongful acts committed by EMS or its agents. The Policy contained a $5 million cap on any single claim and on all aggregate claims.
B. The Creditor Lawsuits
Prior to the filing of EMS's bankruptcy petition, litigation had been commenced against the Debtor by White Lines.Com LLC (" White Lines" ) and Bruce Pollak (" Pollak" ) (collectively, the " Creditors" ) in two separate proceedings: (1) White Lines.Com, LLC, Plaintiff v. EMS Financial Services, LLC, et al., Defendants, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Index Number 653221/2011; and (2) Bruce Pollak, Plaintiff v. EMS Financial Services, LLC, Defendant, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Case Number 11-cv-1969(YK) (collectively, the " Creditor Lawsuits" ). In each of the Creditor Lawsuits, the Creditors assert that funds given to EMS were improperly used. At the time of the bankruptcy filing, both of the Creditors had filed motions for default judgment in their respective courts.
Subsequently, after the bankruptcy case began, the Creditors each filed a motion pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362, seeking an order to vacate the automatic stay so as to permit each of them to continue the prosecution of their respective lawsuits. The bankruptcy court lifted the automatic stay for the limited purpose of allowing the Creditors to adjudicate their respective motions for default judgment, and proceed to an inquest to determine the amount of their claims. On July 24, 2012, the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania denied Pollak's motion for a default judgment, and on October 5, 2012, the Supreme Court of the State of New York denied White Line's motion for a default judgment. Thus, both the White Lines and Pollak lawsuits are currently stayed by the automatic stay in the instant bankruptcy case.
In addition to Creditor Lawsuits, the Creditors each filed a proof of claim in the bankruptcy court proceeding. White Lines filed a proof of claim against EMS on March 22, 2012 in the sum of $7,840,643.00, and Pollak filed a proof of claim against EMS on June 5, 2012 in the sum of $1,325,000.00. The aggregate amount of the proofs of claim filed by White Lines and Pollak total $9,165,643.
C. Procedural History of the Bankruptcy Proceeding and the Adversary Proceeding
On or about May 30, 2012, the Trustee commenced an adversary proceeding against Federal (the " Adversary Proceeding" ). The Trustee seeks (1) a determination that Federal is obligated to indemnify the Debtor for the damages being sought by the Creditors, and (2) a declaration that Federal shall turn over the full limits of liability under the Policy.
On August 6, 2012, in lieu of filing an Answer in the Bankruptcy Court, Federal filed with the bankruptcy court a motion to dismiss the Trustee's Complaint.
On August 7, 2012, Federal filed a motion in this Court to withdraw the Adversary Proceeding from the bankruptcy court. On October 1, 2012, the Trustee filed an opposition to the withdrawal, to which Federal replied on October 22, 2012.
Subsequently, on January 4, 2013, the bankruptcy court denied Federal's motion to dismiss the Trustee's Complaint.
A. Legal Standard
Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1334(a), the district courts are given original and exclusive jurisdiction of all cases under Title 11 of the United States Code, which concerns bankruptcy proceedings. Conversely, 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) provides that when a civil proceeding
arises under Title 11, or arises in or relates to a case under Title 11, " the district court[ ] shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction." Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a), a district court has the discretion to refer to the bankruptcy court " any or all cases under [T]itle 11 and any or all proceedings ...