Aymar v. Stassinos, et al

Filing 43

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/29/09: The stipulation of the parties is hereby adopted. The Motion to Compel (in case # 2561) is vacated without prejudice to its renewal, if necessary 40 . (Kaminski, H)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ronald Wilcox SBN 176601 LAW OFFICE OF RONALD WILCOX 2160 The Alameda, 1st Flr., Suite F San José, CA 95126-1001 Tel: (408) 296-0400 Fax: (408) 296-0486 Email: ronaldwilcox@yahoo.com Joseph Mauro (admitted pro hac vice) 8 LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH MAURO, LLC. 306 McCall Avenue 9 West Islip, NY 11795 10 Tel: (631) 669-0921 Fax: (631) 669-5071 11 Email: joemauroesq@hotmail.com 12 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 13 PATRICK AYMAR and SHERELLE MELTON 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Defendants. 21 22 23 24 25 SHERELLE MELTON, Plaintiff, v. P A U L R. STASSINOS, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION PATRICK AYMAR, Plaintiff, v. P A U L R. STASSINOS, ET AL., Case No. 2:07-CV-02561 JAM GGH Stipulation Regarding Motion to Compel and Order Case No. 2:07-CV-02799 JAM GGH RELATED CASES U.S. DISTRICT COURT 501 I Street, Courtroom #24, 8th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Date: February 5, 2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. HON. GREG HOLLOWS ET AL., Defendants. 1 S t ip u la tio n Regarding Motion to Compel and [Proposed] Order C A S E NO.: 2:07-CV-02561 JAM GGH, CASE NO.: 2:07-CV-02799 JAM GGH 1 2 Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Compel which was set to be heard on February 5, 2009. 3 Defendants shall produce the below information by Friday, February 6, 2009 (Defendants shall 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Date: 1/27/09 19 20 /s/Candace Pagliero 21 ___________________ 22 Candace Pagliero 23 /s/Darrell Spence ___________________ 24 Darrell Spence 25 /s/Ronald Wilcox ___________________ Ronald Wilcox 2 S t ip u la tio n Regarding Motion to Compel and [Proposed] Order C A S E NO.: 2:07-CV-02561 JAM GGH, CASE NO.: 2:07-CV-02799 JAM GGH provide available deposition dates for Stassinos by February 6, 2009, with the deposition to occur after that date). The parties hereby stipulate to the following: 1) Financial Condition and Net Worth: The parties shall enter into a Stipulated Protective Order. Defendants shall produce all responsive documents relating to financial condition and net worth for the past three years. Defendants shall supplement their responses to Interrogatory #12 (Identify the net worth including the assets and liabilities of Defendant). Paul Stassinos will testify at deposition regarding his financial condition and net worth. 2) Personnel files: Defendants shall produce the personnel files of Alex Davido and Adam Perry (excluding items such as medical information, sick leave, etc) for the past three years. The parties understand the documents sought are disciplinary records, performance evaluations, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act tests, and salary/compensation information, etc.). 3) Consumer complaints: Defendants shall inform Plaintiffs by Friday, January 30, 2009, whether there are any responsive documents, and whether such will be voluntarily produced. 4) Telephone records/billing records: Defendants shall produce all responsive documents, at first redacted to only reveal the phone numbers relating to Plaintiffs' accounts. In the event Plaintiff believes the documents are not redacted properly the parties will meet and confer regarding whether other documents need to be produced. Respectfully, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. The stipulation of the parties is hereby adopted. The Motion to Compel (Docket # 40 in case # 2561) is vacated without prejudice to its renewal, if necessary. ORDER 11 Date: January 29, 2009 12 13 _/s/ Gregory G. Hollows_________________________ HON. GREGORY HOLLOWS 14 U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 S t ip u la tio n Regarding Motion to Compel and [Proposed] Order C A S E NO.: 2:07-CV-02561 JAM GGH, CASE NO.: 2:07-CV-02799 JAM GGH

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?