Opinion
No. 02 C 2305
August 2, 2002
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On May 23, 2002, this court enjoined Donald W. Parrillo and Kimberly E. Schob from initiating any action anywhere relating to the assets included in the Indiana bankruptcy estate or to the enforcement of Reilly's judgments against him, without first having obtained leave of this court. We also dismissed their complaint. A motion for relief from judgment was denied on June 20, 2002, but we granted leave to them to file a motion to reconsider by July 5, 2002. Instead, they filed a notice of appeal on July 1, 2002.
In the meantime, however, they each filed, on June 10, 2002, complaints in the federal court in Arizona which may violate the injunction. Leave of this court to file was not sought or obtained. A petition for a rule to show cause was filed by the defendants on June 20, 2002, but was continued on that date because of the expected filing of a motion for reconsideration. Since the motion for reconsideration was never filed — plaintiffs choosing to appeal instead — there is no reason to continue consideration of the petition.
The injunction remains in full force and effect, and we have full power and authority to enforce that injunction, absent a stay. United States v. Articles of Food and Drug, 441 F. Supp. 772 (E, D. Wisc. 1977). We direct Donald W. Parrillo and Kimberly E. Schob to appear before this court on August 21, 2001, at 10 a.m., to show cause why they should not beheld to be in contempt of court. Defendants in this action shall provide for personal service upon the plaintiffs.