June 12, 2002
In the Matter of a Mail Dispute Between
GORDON H. BROOKS
and
JOHN W. EHRHARDT
P.S. Docket No. MD 02-62
APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT GORDON H. BROOKS:
Frank E. Sisson, III, Esq.
180 Post Road East, Suite 202
P. O. Box 5228
Westport, CT 06881-5228
APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT JOHN W. EHRHARDT:
John W. Ehrhardt, Ph.D.
157 Old Huckleberry Road
Wilton, CT 06897-2810
POSTAL SERVICE DECISION
On May 16, 2002, a Postal Service Decision was issued in which the rights of the respective parties to obtain delivery of the mail in dispute were decided. Because a state superior court order appointing a temporary receiver had been issued but the file did not reflect that the temporary receiver had accepted the appointment, the issuance of a final order was suspended for 10 days from the date of receipt of the decision to allow the disputants an opportunity to present an authenticated court document or an affidavit from the appointed receiver establishing that the receiver had accepted appointment, was currently operating the business and was entitled to receive the corporation's mail.
Within the 10 day period, Disputant John W. Ehrhardt, Ph.D. requested a stay of the Postal Service Decision, arguing that the mail should continue to be held for an additional 30 days or until the state court decides a motion for summary dissolution of Executive Resource Group, Inc. Dr. Ehrhardt stated that the court decision could reasonably be expected to be issued at a hearing scheduled for June 10, 2002. However, Dr. Ehrhardt's submission did not include the information necessary to support delivery of the disputed mail to the court appointed receiver. Moreover, as of the date of this decision, Dr. Ehrhardt has not advised the Judicial Officer that a court decision on the motion for summary disposition has been issued.
Accordingly, as Dr. Ehrhardt has not shown that a court appointed receiver is entitled to obtain delivery of the disputed mail or that there is good cause for continuing to hold the mail, a final order providing for the disposition of the disputed mail in accordance with the previously issued Postal Service Decision is hereby issued. If the court orders a different disposition of the disputed mail, mail received thereafter will be delivered in accordance with the court's order.[1]
The parties are reminded that the Postal Service Decisions issued in this case determine only the right to delivery of the mail in dispute not the ownership of the mail. If either party receives mail intended for the other, that party is responsible for forwarding such mail to the intended recipient.
James A. Cohen
Judicial Officer
June 12, 2002
TO THE POSTMASTER AT:
NEW CANAAN, CT 06840-9998
RE: The Mail Dispute Between
GORDON H. BROOKS
and
JOHN W. EHRHARDT
P. S. Docket No. MD 02-62
ORDER[2]
All mail, currently being held or hereafter received, which is addressed to Executive Resource Group, Inc., Executive Resource Group, ERG, ERGResource, ERGResearch, any name including the initials "ERG", and/or any mail in care of Executive Research Group at 35 Bank Street, New Canaan, CT 06840-6202 is to be delivered as directed by Gordon H. Brooks. All mail addressed solely to the name John Ehrhardt or M.V. Ehrhardt, 35 Bank Street, New Canaan, CT 06840-6202 is to be delivered as addressed.
James A. Cohen
Judicial Officer