Sigari v. Banasik

Background

The court considered a defendant’s emergency motion to appoint a receiver for Qyral, LLC. A receiver is a person appointed by a court to oversee some or all of an entity’s affairs. The plaintiffs opposed the motion in part: they agreed that a receivership was warranted but disputed the proposed scope and the choice of receiver.

Court’s Analysis

The court agreed that a receivership was necessary to help ensure that Qyral remained a going concern, particularly because each side had asserted that the other had engaged in improper conduct concerning Qyral’s operations. The court described appointment of a receiver as an extraordinary equitable remedy and determined that, at this early stage, a limited receivership was more appropriate than a general receivership.

The court reviewed the parties’ competing submissions about the proposed receiver, including declarations from A. Kyle Everett and Kevin A. Singer. It found Singer to be the better candidate because of his extensive experience with receiverships and lower hourly rates.

Order

The court ordered the parties to meet and confer and agree on the scope of the limited receivership assignment. It further ordered them to submit a joint proposed order appointing Singer to a limited receivership over Qyral by 3:00 p.m. on Friday, April 12, 2024. The court stated that it would review and approve the appointment so the parties could engage Singer by the close of business that day. The opinion directs the filing of the proposed order; it does not state that the appointment had already been finally approved.