Gaddis v. Defender Security Company

Filing 24

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/25/2015 ORDERING 22 the Court ORDERS that Lenden Webb's petition to remain on the electronic service list for this case be DENIED. 23 (Reader, L)

1

5

Amy R. Lovegren-Tipton (SBN 258697)
LAW OFFICE OF AMY R.
LOVEGREN-TIPTON, APLC
5703 N. West Avenue, Suite 103
Fresno, California 93711
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

6

Attorney for Plaintiff, JOSE GADDIS, an individual

2
3
4

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8
9

11
12
5703 N. West Avenue, Suite 103
Fresno, California 93711

LAW OFFICE OF AMY R. LOVEGREN-TIPTON, APLC

10

13
14
15
16

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
)
)
)
JOSE GADDIS, an individual,,
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
)
DEFENDER SECURITY COMPANY, a
Nevada corporation; and Does 1 through 25, )
)
inclusive,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No.: 1:14-CV-01206---MJS
OPPOSITION TO LENDEN WEBB’S
ELECTRONIC SERVICE NOTICE AND
ORDER THEREON

17
18
19
20
21
22
23

TO THE COURT, AND ALL ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, PLEASE TAKE NOTICE
THAT:
I, Amy R. Lovegren-Tipton, am the counsel of record for Plaintiff JOSE GADDIS in
the above-captioned matter. On March 4, 2015, JOSE GADDIS’S former attorney Lenden F.
Webb (SBN 258697) filed a Notice of Lien in this matter. On March 23, 2015, Attorney
Webb, who is not a party in the matter, and who no longer represents a party in the matter,

24

petitioned this court to remain on the court’s electronic service list for this case, citing the

25

existence of his lien as the reason to be included on the service list. (See Document 19,

26

PROPOSED ORDER re Electronic Service Notice by Jose Gaddis. (Webb, Lenden), filed on

27
28

OPPOSITION TO LENDEN WEBB’S ELECTRONIC SERVICE NOTICE AND ORDER
THEREON
-1-

1

March 23, 2015 at 10:01 am PDT. [“By virtue of this lien, I ask that the court continue to

2

keep my email address … on the electronic service list for this case.”].)

3

Plaintiff JOSE GADDIS herein opposes his former attorney’s request on the

4

grounds that, in California, the trial court in the underlying actions “has no jurisdiction to

5

determine the existence or validity of an attorney's lien on the judgment. [Citations].”

6

Carroll v. Interstate Brands Corp. (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 1168, 1173 [121 Cal.Rptr.2d 532,

7

535]. Accordingly, since there is no established or validated lien on any recovery, then

8

Attorney Lenden Webb has “no right to intervene” in the case or otherwise make demands

9

on this court. Hendricks v. Superior Court In and For City and County of San Francisco

11
12
5703 N. West Avenue, Suite 103
Fresno, California 93711

LAW OFFICE OF AMY R. LOVEGREN-TIPTON, APLC

10

13

(1961) 197 Cal.App.2d 586, 589 [17 Cal.Rptr. 364].
Should Lenden Webb want to stay informed of the status of the matter, he only
need look on PACER.
Based on the foregoing legal authority, Plaintiff JOSE GADDIS respectfully

14

requests that this court deny former attorney Lenden Webb’s request to remain on the

15

electronic service list.

16
17

Dated: March 24, 2015

LAW OFFICE OF
AMY R. LOVEGREN-TIPTON, APLC

18
19
20

By:

/s/ Amy R. Lovegren-Tipton
AMY R. LOVEGREN-TIPTON
Attorney for PLAINTIFF JOSE GADDIS

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

OPPOSITION TO LENDEN WEBB’S ELECTRONIC SERVICE NOTICE AND ORDER
THEREON
-2-

1

ORDER

2
3
4

Based on the foregoing, the Court ORDERS that Lenden Webb’s petition to remain
on the electronic service list for this case be DENIED.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED

6
7
8

Dated: March 25, 2015

9

11

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

12
5703 N. West Avenue, Suite 103
Fresno, California 93711

LAW OFFICE OF AMY R. LOVEGREN-TIPTON, APLC

10

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

OPPOSITION TO LENDEN WEBB’S ELECTRONIC SERVICE NOTICE AND ORDER
THEREON
-3-