Tag Archives: diamond comic distributors

Discovery Hashed Out in Court Cases Between Diamond and some Publishers

Diamond Comic Distributors

One of the major outstanding issues with Diamond‘s bankruptcy is the status of consignment inventory. Diamond currently has stock that was provided to it by publishers on a consignment basis. That stock is currently physically held by Sparkle Pop which purchased some of Diamond’s assets, including taking over the warehouse where these are stored, though they don’t have a right to sell it (which they did and there was drama around that). Earlier today, we reported that a group of publishers filed a motion to dismiss their cases and thus take control of their goods. But, there’s still a few more publishers that are outstanding and since that motion hasn’t been decided, things are still in motion.

Today, a report was filed concerning the cases of Goodman Games, BOOM! Entertainment, Fantagraphics, and Avatar Press, laying out the plans for “discovery.”

The various parties and Diamond met on February 26 and March 3-4 to attempt to find a resolution, the nature of the claims and defenses, to arrange disclosures, and propose a discovery plan.

Discovery is a process where documents are handed over to the lawyers for them to go through. This could be contracts, emails, text messages, and more and is a gathering of evidence to be used during the trial. It can be a costly process and involve millions of documents that need to be sorted through. With that, rules and dates are laid out for the case concerning the discover process including on the production protocol.

There are key dates now as per the initial agreement.

(a) Discovery Requests. The Parties shall serve all initial document requests, interrogatories, and requests for admissions on or before May 11, 2026.
(b) Agree on ESI Search Terms. The Parties will make reasonable efforts to agree on ESI Search Terms on or before May 25, 2026.
(c) Substantial Document Production Completion Date. The Parties expect to have document production substantially completed by July 6, 2026.
(d) Fact Discovery Cut Off. The Parties have agreed that, except for Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures, all fact discovery in this case shall be initiated so that it will be completed on or before August 31, 2026. The Parties have agreed that they may take fact depositions at any time prior to the expiration of the fact discovery deadline.
(e) Privilege Logs. Privilege logs shall be produced in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure so as to be completed within five (5) business days of the related document production. Privileged communications occurring after April 29, 2025, need not be included on a privilege log.
(f) Expert Initial Disclosures. The identify of expert witness and subject matter of expected testimony, per Rule 26(a)(2)(A) and 26(a)(2)(C)(i), shall be disclosed on September 8, 2026. Any rebuttal experts, and subject matter of expected testimony, shall be disclosed on September 18, 2026.
(g) Expert Reports and Expert Discovery Cut Off. Expert reports and all other information required by Rule 26(a)(2)(B), along with any documents or information considered by the expert, shall be exchanged on October 8, 2026. Rebuttal expert reports and all other information required by Rule 26(a)(2)(B), along with any documents or information considered by the expert, shall be exchanged on October 29, 2026. All expert discovery shall be completed by November 20, 2026.

With that final date, that would mean the earliest a trial would happen would be late November but with Thanksgiving, early December is more likely and this agreement estimates it’d last 3 to 4 days.

Publishers Motion to Dismiss Diamond’s Adversary Complaints

Diamond Comic Distributors

One of the major outstanding issues with Diamond‘s bankruptcy is the status of consignment inventory. Diamond currently has stock that was provided to it by publishers on a consignment basis. That stock is currently physically held by Sparkle Pop which purchased some of Diamond’s assets, including taking over the warehouse where these are stored, though they don’t have a right to sell it (which they did and there was drama around that).

Diamond wants to sell the consigned goods to help pay back its creditors. Publishers obviously want their stock back. A judge put a stay on the decision which has been playing out for months. Diamond then went a submitted adversary proceedings against publishers, over 30 of them. In short, instead of this decision being handled at a macro level, the judge said Diamond could sue each publisher individually to figure out the product status.

Now, Diamond is in chapter 7 and due to key dates having passed, the Consignment Group, which is made up of multiple publishers, has submitted motions in each of those adversary proceedings to dismiss the complaints. Oddly a filing had the Trustee of the chapter 7 process selling the consigned goods to Sparkle Pop so it’s unclear how this motion and that clashes.

Filings by Massive Publishing, Oni Press, Panini, Alien Books, Titan Comics, Vault Storyworks, Dynamic Forces, Aspen, Black Mask Studio, Dark Horse, DSTLRY, Heavy Metal, and Magnetic Press were all revealed today were submitted to the court to “Dismiss Adversary Proceeding Complaint(s).”

The motion goes right into it stating that Diamond has not submitted facts to back up their complaint and discovery has not revealed evidence, and that the court can dismiss it over this.

The Complaint(s) in this case is devoid of any meritorious allegations that might possibly support Plaintiff’s claims; thus, this Complaint must be dismissed.

The filing then goes on about the agreement between Diamond and the publishers saying it’s “executory in nature” and Diamond’s obligations were to ship goods, properly store the goods, and pay the publishers when the goods ae sold.

On December 19, 2025, Diamond’s Chapter 11 was switched to Chapter 7 and with that, they had until February 17, 2026 to assume or reject an executory contract. The deadline to assume or reject their contracts has been an issue throughout the Chapter 11/Chapter 7 case with the deadline to do so pushed out over and over. The latest request to extend the deadline was denied in early February.

February 17 has come and gone and since the deadline wasn’t extended again and the agreements weren’t assumed, then they can be deemed rejected.

Because the agreement has been rejected, they are now terminated the Consignment Group argues and the agreement is now in breach and the next steps due to that breach need to be determined.

The Consignment Group feels the agreement has answers to that and as per a Supreme Court case, the publishers would then retain the rights it has received under the agreement. The motion lists out the various ways the agreement can be terminated (something we have mentioned before) and then goes on to state since the Consignors are owed money still and no proof of claim has been filed, the agreement has been terminated by its own terms.

The agreement lays out what happens next:

  1. Effect of Termination
    d. Except as provided herein, the termination of this Agreement shall not relieve or release any party from any of its obligations existing prior to such termination. Upon termination of this Agreement, title to all material containing the
    Trademarks, or Seller’s copyrights, service marks, or similar rights shall be deemed to have automatically vested in Seller. Unless otherwise agreed to by Seller, Buyer shall immediately deliver such material to Seller, at Seller’s cost. Buyer, at Seller’s option, may destroy such material at Seller’s cost, and upon such destruction furnish Seller a certificate of destruction satisfactory to Seller and signed by an officer of Buyer.

In short, the Buyer (aka Diamond) needs to return the goods to the Seller (aka publishers) with the Sellers paying for shipping. The Buyer can also destroy the material if the Seller wants, with the Seller paying for that.

The Consignment Group’s motion then concludes that due to all of that, the consigned goods are now clearly owned by the publishers and the Adversary Complaints should be dismissed.

This is a pretty big motion that might be the first real step to settle the outstanding question as to who owns the consigned goods. With the lapse of the date concerning the acceptance or rejection of existing agreements, the publisher’s case gets stronger.

We’ll be watching this closely and report when the court makes a decision regarding this key issue.

Diamond’s Chapter 7 Gets Testy with Questions of Secret Payment Arrangements

Diamond’s Chapter 7 Trustee Morgan W. Fisher‘s application to employ Stearns, Weaver, Miller, Weissler, Alhadeff, & Sitterson, P.A. as bankruptcy counsel (don’t they already have some?) should have been rather simple. But, things feel like they’re getting testy in a response to that proposed order by Goodman Games.

Goodman Games is a tabletop game publisher best known for Dungeon Crawl Classics and was founded in 2001.

In their filing on February 26, Goodman Games states it has no problem with the Trustee retaining “qualified bankruptcy counsel per se” but it’s what comes next that’s intriguing:

Goodman Games understands that there may be an arrangement between the Trustee and one or more secured creditors concerning the payment of the Trustee’s fees and expenses, whether in the form of a carve-out from collateral, a sharing of recoveries, or another similar agreement.

To the extent such arrangement exists, Goodman Games respectfully submits that it should be fully disclosed so that the Court and all creditors are aware of the nature and terms of the agreement.

Goodman Games has requested this information from the Applicant. As of the filing of this Response, the Application does not describe any such arrangement.

Goodman Games therefore respectfully requests that, to the extent any such agreement or understanding exists concerning the funding or payment of the Trustee’s professionals’ fees, the Trustee and/or Applicant provide appropriate disclosure so that the Court and parties in interest are fully informed in connection with consideration of the Application.

Woah… that’s a pretty big response. It teases that there’s some backroom discussions and dealings going on with a process that’s supposed to be very transparent.

The bankruptcy court is taking it seriously. They’ve requested a memorandum addressing the matter of “undisclosed arrangements with creditors for the payment of the Trustees fees and expenses.”

No action will be taken on the Application (and the related pending motions for admission pro hac vice) unless and until the Trustee files a supplemental memorandum addressing the matter of undisclosed arrangements with creditors for the payment of the Trustees fees and expenses referred to in the Response filed by Goodman Games [Docket No. 1172]. If such a memorandum is not filed by March 15, 2026, the Application may be denied without further notice or order of court.

In a process that has been full of drama, a new chapter is being written. AS Kurt Vonnegut would say, “so it goes.”

Check out the two court documents below:

Order to Extend Time to Decide on Consigned Goods Contract Denied in Diamond’s Chapter 7 Case

One of the major issues that has yet to still be resolved regarding Diamond’s Chapter 7 process is the status of consigned goods being held by (old) Diamond and stored by Sparkle Pop. At issue is that some inventory was provided by publishers to (old) Diamond when it was in business that was provided on consignment. When Diamond went into Chapter 11, they claimed the goods were theirs due to the lack of some paperwork filed by publishers and the goods were used to obtain a loan. The publishers of course say the goods are theirs and want it back. A fight has been ongoing with a lot of maneuvering in the court.

As we reported earlier today , the Trustee who is overseeing the Chapter 7 case has asked for an extension of a deadline to figure out how to deal with it all and the Ad Hoc Committee of Consignors as well as members of the Consignment Group objected to that.

The court overseeing the case has now ruled, denying the motion to extend the time period.

Upon consideration of the Emergency Motion to Extend Time to Assume or Reject Executory Contracts Related to Consigned Goods [Docket No. 1156] (the “Motion”) filed by the Morgan W. Fisher, the Chapter 7 Trustee, and the Court having held a hearing on February 26, 2026, and considered the objections thereto [Docket Nos. 1163 & 1164], and for the reasons stated on the record at the conclusion of the hearing the Court having determined that the Motion was untimely filed under 11 U.S.C. §§ 348(c) & 365(d), it is, by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland;
ORDERED, that the Motion is hereby, DENIED.

Alliance vs. Diamond Gets Discovery Dates

There’s a lot of side quests when it comes to Diamond’s Chapter 11/Chapter 7 drama. There’s numerous lawsuits that have spun out of it, dozens depending on how you want to count them. One of the more dramatic ones is Alliance Entertainment‘s lawsuit against Diamond and its associates.

In April 2025, Alliance Entertainment submitted a complaint against Diamond accusing Diamond of “fraud” and “deception” as far as their relationship with Wizards of the Coast, the company behind Magic: The Gathering. Wizards did not continue its distribution agreement past December 2024 and didn’t inform Alliance. Diamond and its representatives actually attempted to obfuscate it and keep it from Alliance during the deal.

That lawsuit has been slow, but ongoing, and now we have the next steps as it looks like there might be an agreement when it comes to discovery.

Discovery is the process where documents need to be handed over to lawyers allowing them to gather evidence. Emails, documents, internal chats, those are all examples of discovery and it can involve millions of documents depending on the lawsuit.

The following is what’s proposed:

(a) Discovery Requests. The Parties shall serve all document requests, interrogatories, and requests for admissions on or before March 16, 2026.
(b) Substantial Document Production Completion Date. Document production shall be substantially completed by June 8, 2026.
(c) Fact Discovery Cut Off. The Parties have agreed that, except for Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures, all fact discovery in this case will be completed on or before July 20, 2026. The Parties have agreed that they may take fact depositions at any time prior to the expiration of the fact discovery deadline.
(d) Privilege Logs. Privilege logs shall be produced in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure so as to be completed within fourteen (14) business days of the related document production. Privileged communications occurring after April 29, 2025, need not be included on a privilege log.
(e) Experts. The Parties do not presently intend to call any expert witnesses. To the extent that changes, the Parties will meet and confer to discuss deadlines pertaining to expert discovery.

Also mentioned:

  1. Protective Orders and ESI Protocol. The Parties will submit a confidentiality order and ESI Protocol to the Court for approval on or before April 3, 2026.
  2. Case Dispositive Motions. Any dispositive motions must be filed thirty (30) days after the completion of fact discovery. Answering briefs in opposition thereto are due thirty (30) days later, with reply briefs to be filed fourteen (14) days after the filing of any answering briefs.
  3. Joinder of Other Parties and Amendment of Pleadings. All motions to join other parties, and to amend or supplement the pleadings, shall be filed on or before April 24, 2026.
  4. Pretrial Order. If this adversary proceeding cannot be resolved on dispositive motions, the Parties have agreed to file a Joint Pretrial Report within thirty (30) days of the Court’s ruling on dispositive motions.
  5. Length of Trial. The Parties estimate that the time required to try this adversary proceeding will be four (4) days.

This is a pretty big step for this case to proceed and looks like we’ll get more about the middle of the year when it comes to a resolution and decision, if not before.

Check out the full documents below:

Fight Over Consigned Goods Continues with Objections and a Settlement with Sparkle Pop

One of the major issues that has yet to still be resolved regarding Diamond’s Chapter 7 process is the status of consigned goods being held by (old) Diamond and stored by Sparkle Pop.

At issue is that some inventory was provided by publishers to (old) Diamond when it was in business that was provided on consignment. When Diamond went into Chapter 11, they claimed the goods were theirs due to the lack of some paperwork filed by publishers and the goods were used to obtain a loan. The publishers of course say the goods are theirs and want it back. A fight has been ongoing with a lot of maneuvering in the court.

The Trustee who is overseeing the Chapter 7 case has asked for an extension of a deadline to figure out how to deal with it all.

The Ad Hoc Committee of Consignors as well as members of the Consignment Group have objected for a further deadline extension with a filing featuring some pretty harsh words.

The Ad Hoc Committee of Consignors claims that the delays is an intension to “use remaining estate assets on litigation and attorney’s fees rather than paying creditors.” Instead of using the time to “build consensus and explore settlement opportunities,” the Trustee has used the first sixty days to hire a litigation team in Florida.

Objections to Diamond’s claims have been submitted since at least May 15, 2025 and have dragged out since.

The filing by The Ad Hoc Committee of Consignors is an interesting read laying out their case an argument and you can get a sense of the frustration. The Consignment Group reveals some dirt as to how much is owed to some of the publishers while pointing out that Diamond’s November Operating Report shows $1,308,292.00 cash on hand.

ConsignorPetition Disclosable Economic Interest in Case
Aspen Mlt, Inc$1,890.50 (Scheduled Amount)
Black Mask Studios$2,000.15 (Scheduled Amount)
Creative Mind Energy$12,878.62 (Scheduled Amount)
Dark Horse Comics, Inc$86,927.11 (Proof of Claim No. 692)
DSTLRY Media$65,013.15 (Scheduled Amount)
Dynamic Forces, Inc$244,201.44 (Proof of Claim No. 680)
Graphic Mundi – PSU Press$15,523.33 (Scheduled Amount)
Heavy Metal Entertainment$363.37 (Scheduled Amount)
Magnetic Press LLC$51,067.53 (Proof of Claim No. 684)
Massive Publishing LLC$40,700.69 (Proof of Claim No. 703)
Oni-LF Publishing Group, LLC$179,942.40 (Proof of Claim No. 682)
Panini UK Ltd$4,993.05 (Scheduled Amount)
Punk Bot Comic Books, LLC$122,006.87 (Proof of Claim No. 509)
Titan Publishing Group Ltd$413,898.17 (Proof of Claim No. 49)
Total$1,241,450.29

In a more surprising turn of events, the Chapter 7 Trustee and Sparkle Pop have reached a settlement to:

finally resolve the above captioned bankruptcy estates’ interests in the Consigned Goods, the Distribution Agreements, and the Consignment Litigation (as those terms are defined in the Motion) a component of which is the potential sale and assignment of the estates’ interest therein.

The settlement involves:

  1. Sparkle Pop will pay the Trustee $1,000,000, 75% of the first $1,500,000 in Net Proceeds of the Consigned Inventory. Sparkle Pop gets 30% of the gross proceeds as an expense association with selling the Consigned Inventory.
  2. If the date this gets settled is before March 1, Sparkle Pop is allowed to get administrative expense claim against the Bankruptcy Estates in the amount of $435,000 and if the effective date is after March 1, that goes up to $585,000.
  3. The Trustee is selling and assigning all of the Bankruptcy Estates’ rights in the Consigned Inventory to Sparkle Pop.
  4. No more than 10 days after the date of approval, the following actions will be taken:
    • a. Withdraw, with prejudice, the Motion (I) to Enforce the Automatic Stay, (II) To Enforce the Sale Order, and (III) Granting Related Relief [D.I. 784]; and
    • b. Substitute as plaintiff, or proceed to dismiss, without prejudice, the Consignment Adversary Proceedings.
  5. Sparkle Pop will provide a list of Consignment Agreements designated for assumption and assignment along with Sparkle Pop’s proposed cure cost for each.

We’re sure the publishers will be responding to this proposal. You can read the documents below:

Bankruptcy Counsel and Accountant Updates for Diamond’s Chapter 7 Process

There’s been some updates to Diamond‘s chapter 7 process and the winding down of its chapter 11. Two are proposed additions to the team handling the chapter 7 process.

Larry Strauss and Larry Strauss ESQ, CPA & Associates, Inc. have been approved and ordered as accountants to the Trustee.

Stearns, Weaver, Miller, Weissler, Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A. have been proposed as the bankruptcy counsel for the case to support the Trustee.

The hourly rates would be:

Partners: $650.00 to $975.00 per hour
Associates: $350.00 to $625.00 per hour
Paralegals: $200.00 to $325.00 per hour

You can see related documents for both below:

Breaking: Diamond Submits its Final Chapter 11 Report. Financial State Revealed!

Diamond Comic Distributors

In December, Diamond‘s chapter 11 process was changed to chapter 7 ending one part of the process and beginning a new one that will end the drama that began January 2025. The case was converted to chapter 7 on December 31, 2025 at 11:59 pm.

As part of that, Diamond is required to file a final report which includes:

  • A Summary of Bank Accounts and Cash Balances as of Conversion Date
  • B Schedule of Other Receivables as of Conversion Date
  • C Consigned Inventory Balance as of Conversion Date
  • D Summary of Unpaid Chapter 11 Debts as of Conversion Date

First up is the summary of Bank Accounts and Cash Balances as of December 31.

  1. Alliance Game Distributors Alliance Depository $6,527.87
  2. Diamond Comic Distributors, Inc. Operati Diamond Operating $114,203.77
  3. Diamond Comic Distributors, Inc. Diamond Controlled Disbursement $1,373.70
  4. Diamond Comic Distributors, Inc. Diamond Depository $153,367.86
  5. Diamond Comic CAD BMO CAD$ $33,192.22
  6. Diamond Comic USD BMO USD$ $2,040.78
  7. Diamond Comic Distributors Inc DCD JPM Canadian – CAD$ $(16.52)
  8. Diamond Comic Distributors Inc DCD JPM Canadian – USD$ $(0.62)

Balances in items #1, #4, #5, and #6 represent funds collected from customers for the account of Universal Distribution and Sparkle Pop.

$108,568.92 of such amount represents amounts funded under the Sparkle Pop TSA.

Receivables as of December 31 are as follows:

DescriptionAmount
Due From Renegade Games 68,998.27
Due From E Gerber Products 26,162.69
Due From Diamond Select Toys 7,548,878.24
Due From Diamond International Galleries 3,698,722.31
Due From Gemstone494,250.13
Due From S Geppi186,139.66
Due From Rosebud1,745,256.00
Net Due From Affiliates$13,768,407.30

Then there’s the Consigned Inventory Balance which shows off why this is such a contentious issue:

DescriptionBook ValueRetail
Consignment Vendor Total47,395,013.95113,737,037.14

And finally, the final summary of unpaid Chapter 11 Debts as of December 31, 2025:

DescriptionBalance
DIP Interest Expense123,396
December Consignment Storage126,506
Post Petition AP – Alliance Games993,314
Post Petition AP – Diamond Comics1,656,086
Total2,899,302

For those that like the official documents…







Update: JPMorgan and Sparkle Pop’s Time to Respond to Questions over their Interest in Diamond Inventory Extended

The Diamond chapter 11 process is now chapter 7 and with that, it creates a ripple across numerous related lawsuits. One such group of lawsuits involves JPMorgan‘s “Validity, Priority or Extent of a Lien or Other Interest in Property.” In question is inventory that Diamond has that is consignment goods provided by publishers. The goods are being held in a warehouse controlled by Sparkle Pop. It is before the court as to figure out who actually owns the inventory. Does Diamond, who can then sell it and pay back its creditors, like JPMorgan? Also, what claim does JPMorgan have as far as the inventory since the inventory was used as collateral by Diamond to get a loan?

The question concerns multiple lawsuits spanning multiple publishers with all of the various court documents similar. JPMorgan now has until February 16, 2026 to respond to this.

Update: Sparkle Pop‘s time to respond to the same complaint has also been extended to February 16. The order is below.

Original complaint example:

Klestadt Winters Jureller Southard & Stevens withdraws as NECA’s Counsel for Diamond’s Chapter 11 Case

As Diamond‘s chapter 11 process is now chapter 7, there’s been shifts in the case such as an appointment of a trustee to oversee the chapter 7 process. As part of that process, counsel for other parties will begin to withdraw from the case as their services are no longer needed. Klestadt Winters Jureller Southard & Stevens has notified the court it’s withdrawing from the case as the counsel to NECA.

The Firm’s engagement on behalf of NECA, LLC was in connection with specific matters that are no longer pending in this Bankruptcy Case. The engagement of the Firm has concluded as to these matters. Local counsel has previously sought to withdraw.

NECA, LLC is no longer involved in this matter and no longer wishes to be represented in this case. Thus, Local Rule (b)(2) in inapplicable.

The local counsel is likely Zvi Guttman who is attempting to become the counsel to the trustee to the case, so this is likely to help that part of the process along.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »