Starr Indemnity & Liability Company v. YRC Inc. et al
Filing
18
STIPULATION re Continuance of Hearing on Parties' Summary Judgment Motions; and ORDER Thereon signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/22/2015. Hearing on Motions for Summary Judgment currently set for 2/13/2015 is CONTINUED to 3/13/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 10 (GSA) before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin.(Martinez, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
Kathleen C. Jeffries (State Bar #110362)
SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON & FEARY, LLP
2 North Lake Avenue, Suite 460
Pasadena, California 91101
Telephone: (626) 795-4700
Facsimile: (626) 795-4790
kjeffries@scopelitis.com
Attorneys for Defendants
YRC INC. and ROADWAY REVERSE LOGISTICS, INC.
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
STARR INDEMNITY & LIABILITY
COMPANY, a corporation,
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
YRC INC., a corporation; ROADWAY )
REVERSE LOGISTICS, INC., a
)
corporation; and DOES ONE through )
FIFTEEN,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________ )
Case No. 1:13−CV−01996−GSA
STIPULATION RE CONTINUANCE OF
HEARING ON PARTIES’ SUMMARY
JUDGMENT MOTIONS; AND ORDER
THEREON
Current Hearing Date: February 13,
2015
Requested Hearing Date: March 13,
2015
(ECF No. 17)
18
19
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this
20
action, plaintiff Starr Indemnity & Liability Company (“Starr Indemnity”) and
21
defendants YRC Inc. (“YRC”) and Roadway Reverse Logistics, Inc. (collectively
22
“defendants”), through their respective counsel of record, that the hearing on
23
the summary judgment motions of both parties, currently set for February 13,
24
2015, be continued to March 13, 2015; and that the corresponding opposition
25
and reply deadlines be continued to February 27, 2015 and March 6, 2014,
26
respectively.
27
1
_____________________________________________________________________________
28
STIPULATION RE CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON PARTIES’ SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTIONS; AND ORDER THEREON
1
Good cause exists for this joint request. After exchanging
2
summary judgment motions, the parties have agreed to mediate the case in an
3
effort to resolve the matter in its entirety without the need to file further
4
pleadings or for the Court to prepare for hearing on the motions. The parties
5
have mutually selected a mediator and are currently in the process of
6
scheduling a mediation session by mid-February 2015.
7
8
Dated: January 21, 2015
9
10
SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON
& FEARY, LLP
By:
11
12
13
14
Dated: January 21, 2015
/s/ Kathleen C. Jeffries
Kathleen C. Jeffries
Attorneys for Defendants
YRC INC. and ROADWAY REVERSE
LOGISTICS, INC.
GIBSON ROBB & LINDH, LLP
15
16
17
18
By:
/s/ Konstantin Savransky (as
authorized on January 21, 2015)
Konstantin Savransky
Attorneys for Plaintiff
STARR INDEMNITY & LIABILITY
COMPANY
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
_____________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION RE CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON PARTIES’ SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTIONS; AND ORDER THEREON
ORDER
1
2
Based upon the stipulation by and between the parties, and good cause
3
appearing, the Court orders that the hearing on the summary judgment
4
motions of both parties, currently set for February 13, 2015, is continued to
5
March 13, 2015; and the corresponding opposition and reply deadlines are
6
continued to February 27, 2015 and March 6, 2014, respectively. The parties
7
are encouraged to keep the Court apprised of any settlement developments
8
and may request additional extensions for mediation or settlement exigencies,
9
as needed.
10
11
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
12
13
14
January 22, 2015
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
_____________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION RE CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON PARTIES’ SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTIONS; AND ORDER THEREON
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?