In reply,Valmont partners say court did not consider defendants' non-compliance with two discovery orders

摘要

In a reply brief, the Valmont partners asserted on Aug. 18 the contention that defendants' noncompliance with two discovery orders was considered and ruled upon is not only unsupported, but is contradicted by the record. The case is in federal court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. (See related article on P. 6.)Opposing reconsideration, Ronald W. Satterfield and other defendants asserted that no new factual evidence supports the motion for reconsideration of the denial of default with respect to the partners' claim alleging fraudulent transfer of assets to avoid payment of environmental costs for cleanup at the Valmont Industrial Park in Hazleton, Pennsylvania.