United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
SAMIR HADEED, MD, and JOHNSTOWN HEART AND VASCULAR CENTER, INC., Plaintiffs,
ADVANCED VASCULAR RESOURCES OF JOHNSTOWN, LLC; AVR MANAGEMENT, LLC; and WASHINGTON VASCULAR INSTITUTE, LLC, Defendants.
GIBSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
before the Court is the Motion to Refer Case to Bankruptcy
Court (ECF No. 84) filed by Attorney Robert O. Lampl on
behalf of Advanced Vascular Resources of Johnstown, LLC
("AVR-Johnstown"). For the reasons that follow,
AVR-Johnstown's Motion (ECF No. 84) is GRANTED.
Relevant Procedural and Factual Background
case arises from disputes over the operation of a vascular
services center located in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. In short,
Plaintiffs, who already operated a heart and vascular center
in Johnstown, entered into a series of contracts with
Defendants by which Plaintiffs would operate the
"medical side" of the vascular services center and
Defendants would manage the "business side" of the
center. The present case ensued because Plaintiffs and
Defendants argue that the opposing parties in this dispute
failed to comply with the duties imposed by these contracts.
October 20, 2017, this Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and
Order (ECF No. 78) partially granting and partially denying
both the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiffs (ECF
No. 40) and the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and
Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs' Complaint
filed by Defendants (ECF No. 44). See Hadeed v. Advanced
Vascular Resources of Johnstown, LLC, Case No.
3:15-cv-22, 2017 WL 4998663 (W.D. Pa. Oct. 30, 2017).
the Court's disposition of these motions, the claims and
counterclaims in this case proceeded as follows:
"[I]n regard to the Complaint, Count 1 remains as a
claim brought by only JHVC [i.e., Johnstown Heart and
Vascular Center, Inc.] against only AVR-Management and only
as to breach(es) of the Operating Agreement regarding
mismanagement;Count 2 remains as a remedy dependent on
Count 1; Count 3 is dismissed in its entirety for lack of
jurisdiction; Count 4 remains as a claim brought by only JHVC
against only WVI [i.e., Washington Vascular Institute,
LLC]; and Count 5 was withdrawn by Plaintiffs
and is dismissed in its entirety.
In regard to the counterclaims of the Answer, Count I remains
as a counterclaim under the Sublease and the GPA by
AVR-Johnstown, AVR-Management, and WVI against JHVC; Count II
was withdrawn and is dismissed in its entirety; Count III was
withdrawn and is dismissed in its entirety; Count IV remains
as a counterclaim for unjust enrichment by AVR-Johnstown,
AVR-Management, and WVI against JHVC and Hadeed; and Count V
is dismissed in its entirety due to the elimination of
fiduciary duties by the Operating Agreement.
Id. at *31; ECF No. 78 at 61-62. Most relevant for
the purposes of AVR-Johnstown's pending Motion to Refer
Case to Bankruptcy Court (ECF No. 84), after the disposition
of these motions, AVR-Johnstown's only remaining role in
this case is as a Counter-Plaintiff bringing the
counterclaims included in Count I and Count IV of the Answer.
See Hadeed, 2017 WL 4998663, at *31; ECF No. 78 at
November 22, 2017, AVR-Johnstown, through new counsel,
filed the present Motion to Refer Case to Bankruptcy Court
(ECF No. 84).
courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, as defined by 28
U.S.C. § 1334 and 28 U.S.C. § 157. Section 1334
provides that "the district courts shall have original
but not exclusive jurisdiction of all civil proceedings
arising under title 11 [the Bankruptcy Code], or arising in
or related to cases under title 11." 28 U.S.C. §
1334(b). More specifically, under Section 157(a),
"[e]ach district court may provide that. . . any or all
proceedings arising under title 11 [i.e., the Bankruptcy
Code] or arising in or related to a case under title 11 shall
be referred to the bankruptcy judges for this district."
28 U.S.C. § 157(a) (emphasis added); see In re
Combustion Engineering, Inc., 391 F.3d 190, 225 (3d Cir.
2004) (quoting Celotex Corp. v. Edwards, 514 U.S.
300, 308 (1995)) ("Section 157(a) of the Bankruptcy Code
permits district courts to refer most matters to a bankruptcy
court, " thereby allowing the bankruptcy courts to
"deal efficiently and expeditiously with all matters
connected with the bankruptcy estate."); Safe
Founds., Inc. v. Metal Founds. Acquisitions, LLC, Civil
Action No. 12-1177, 2012 WL 6651540, at *l-*2 (W.D. Pa. Dec.
to this authority, the judges of the United States District
Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania adopted a
standing Order of Reference of Bankruptcy Cases and
Proceedings which provides that "any or all proceedings
arising under Title 11 or arising in or
related to a case under Title 11 ... be and they
hereby are referred to the Bankruptcy Judges of this district
for consideration and resolution." See Order of
Reference of Bankruptcy Cases and Proceedings Nunc Pro Tunc,