Federal proceedings – 19-cv-364

Proposed settlements, click here

On May 23, 2019, the Receiver filed a complaint against The UPS Store, Inc.; Herring Ventures, LLC d/b/a The UPS Store; Austin Elsen; Tammie Elsen; Courtney Herring; Diane Lofton; and Chandler Westover, the notaries and their employer on whom Lamar Adams principally relied to notarize fake timber deeds.

On June 13, 2019, the Receiver amended the complaint to include allegations against Rawlings & MacInnis, PA; Tammy Vinson; and Jeannie Chisholm.

The complaint alleges the defendants’ actions contributed to the success of the Madison Timber Ponzi scheme, and therefore to the debts of the Receivership Estate.

The following are select filings (most recent first) from the federal civil case Alysson Mills vs. The UPS Store, Inc., et al., No. 3:19-cv-00364 (S.D. Miss.):

2023-10-04 [342] Order re status conference

2023-03-22 [340] Order reassigning case to Magistrate Judge Bradley Rath

2022-08-15 [338] Order addressing Receiver’s Objection and denying UPS’s Motion to Compel

2022-03-16 [328] Receiver’s Reply to UPS’s Response to Receiver’s Objection

2022-03-09 [326] UPS’s Response to Receiver’s Objection

2022-02-23 [323] Receiver’s Objection to Order regarding UPS’s Motion to Compel

2022-02-09 [321] Order regarding UPS’s Motion to Compel

2022-02-07 [320] Order quashing UPS’s subpoeanas

2022-01-28 [319] Order regarding Consolidated Discovery

2021-12-06 [315] Receiver’s Response to Defendants’ Proposed Discovery Plan

2021-11-30 [313] Order identifying Defense Liaison Counsel

2021-11-10 [310] Order denying UPS’s Motion to Certify Order for Interlocutory Appeal

2021-10-21 [Docket entry only] “In accordance with the 10/20/2021 Text-Only Order entered in 3:18-cv-866-CWR-FKB staying this case until 1/31/2022 and ordering the parties to submit a discovery plan[.]”

2021-09-30 [302] Order granting Motion to Consolidate

2021-09-14 [296] UPS’s Reply to Receiver’s Response to UPS’s Motion to Consolidate

2021-09-07 [293] Order on Receiver’s Motion to Compel

2021-08-27 [290] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Reply to Receiver’s Response to Rawlings & MacInnis’s Motion to Stay

2021-08-24 [288] Receiver’s Response to UPS’s Motion to Consolidate

2021-08-19 [279] Receiver’s Response to Rawlings & MacInnis’s Motion to Stay

2021-08-10 [261] UPS’s Motion to Consolidate

2021-08-06 [260] Receiver’s Opposition to UPS’s Motion to Compel

2021-08-05 [258] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Motion to Stay

2021-07-21 [246] Receiver’s Reply to UPS’s Opposition to Motion to Seal

2021-07-15 [242] UPS’s Motion to Compel

2021-07-14 [238] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Joinder in UPS’s Opposition to Motion to Seal

2021-07-14 [233] UPS’s Opposition to Motion to Seal

2021-07-07 [230] Receiver’s Reply to UPS’s Opposition to Motion to Quash

2021-07-01 [224] UPS’s Opposition to Receiver’s Motion to Quash

2021-06-30 [Docket entry only] “TEXT-ONLY ORDER: Before the Court is Receiver’s Motion for Expedited Consideration of Urgent and Necessitous Matter [215]. The Court orders that The UPS Store, Inc. shall not seek to enforce the subpoenas at issue, prior to this Court’s ruling on Receiver’s Motion To Quash Subpoenas Or, Alternatively, Motion For Protective Order [213]. If The UPS Store, Inc. receives any documents in response to any of the subject subpoenas prior to said ruling, The UPS Store, Inc. shall not view or do anything with the documents, other than hold them until further instructed by the Court. Accordingly, Receiver’s motion [215] is denied. Responses to Receiver’s motion [213] and Receiver’s rebuttal in support of motion [213] are due in accordance with L.U.Civ.R. 7(b)(4). Signed by Magistrate Judge F. Keith Ball on 6/30/2021.”

2021-06-30 [219] Receiver’s Motion to Seal or Redact

2021-06-29 [218] Receiver’s Reply in Support of Motion to Expedite

2021-06-29 [216] UPS’s Opposition to Motion to Expedite

2021-06-28 [215] Receiver’s Motion to Expedite Motion to Quash Subpoenas

2021-06-28 [213] Receiver’s Motion to Quash Subpoenas

2021-06-22 [209] Receiver’s Motion to Expedite Motion for Protective Order regarding Subpoenas 

2021-06-22 [207] Receiver’s Motion for Protective Order regarding Subpoenas

2021-06-01 [204] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Motion to Depose Lamar Adams

2021-04-12 [187] Receiver’s Opposition to The UPS Store, Inc.’s Motion to Certify Order for Interlocutory Appeal

2021-03-30 [185] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Joinder in Motion for Interlocutory Appeal

2021-03-29 [184] The UPS Store Madison’s Joinder in Motion for Interlocutory Appeal

2021-03-29 [183] The UPS Store, Inc.’s Motion to Certify Order for Interlocutory Appeal

2021-03-18 [178] Receiver’s Reply to The UPS Store, Inc.’s Opposition to Receiver’s Motion to Compel

2021-03-11 [176] The UPS Store, Inc.’s Opposition to Receiver’s Motion to Compel

2021-03-01 [169] Order denying UPS’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction

2021-02-25 [167] Receiver’s Motion to Compel The UPS Store, Inc. to Respond to Discovery Requests

2020-10-19 [158] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Joinder

2020-10-19 [157] The UPS Store Madison’s Joinder

2020-10-19 [156] The UPS Store Inc.’s Reply to Receiver’s Opposition to Motion to Stay Case

2020-10-12 [155] Receiver’s Opposition to The UPS Store Inc.’s Motion to Stay Case

2020-10-09 [154] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Joinder

2020-10-08 [153] The UPS Store Madison’s Joinder

2020-10-07 [152] The UPS Store Inc.’s Reply to Receiver’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction

2020-09-29 [151] The UPS Store Madison’s Joinder

2020-09-28 [150] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Joinder

2020-09-28 [148] The UPS Store Inc.’s Motion to Stay Case

2020-09-23 [147] Receiver’s Opposition to UPS’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction

2020-09-01 [141] The UPS Store Madison’s Joinder

2020-08-27 [140] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Joinder

2020-08-26 [138] The UPS Store, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction

2020-07-06 [90] Protective Order

2020-07-06 [89] Order re Motions for Protective Order

2020-01-03 [66] Receiver’s Reply re Motions for Protective Order

2020-01-03 [65] The UPS Store, Inc.’s Reply re Motions for Protective Order

2020-01-02 [64] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Joinder

2019-01-02 [63] The UPS Store Madison’s Joinder

2019-12-27 [62] The UPS Store, Inc.’s Response re Motions for Protective Order

2019-12-27 [61] Receiver’s Response re Motions for Protective Order

2019-12-13 [59] The UPS Store, Inc.’s Motion for Protective Order

2019-12-12 [57] Receiver’s Motion for Protective Order

2019-10-15 [51] The UPS Store, Inc.’s Answer

2019-10-11 [50] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Answer

2019-09-30 [49] Order denying Rawlings & MacInnis’s and The UPS Store, Inc.’s Motions to Dismiss

2019-09-26 [48] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Reply to Receiver’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

2019-09-26 [47] The UPS Store Inc.’s Reply to Receiver’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

2019-09-12 [43] Receiver’s Opposition to Motions to Dismiss

2019-08-29 [42] The UPS Store Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss

2019-08-26 [38] Chandler Westover’s Answer

2019-08-26 [37] Diane Lofton’s Answer

2019-08-26 [36] Courtney Herring’s Answer

2019-08-26 [35] Tammie Elsen’s Answer

2019-08-26 [34] Austin Elsen’s Answer

2019-08-26 [33] Herring Ventures, LLC’s Answer

2019-08-08 [26] Rawlings & MacInnis’s Motion to Dismiss

2019-06-13 [14] Amended Complaint

2019-05-23 [1] Complaint