McCrary v. Campbell Soup Supply Company, LLC et al
Filing
16
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 10/2/2013 ORDERING 14 Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint shall be the operative complaint in this matter; Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint shall be DEEMED filed upon entry of the Order on this Stipulation; and Defendant shall have 30 days to respond to the Second Amended Complaint to commence upon entry of this Order. (Reader, L)
1
6
KENNETH S. GAINES, ESQ. SBN 049045
ken@gaineslawfirm.com
DANIEL F. GAINES, ESQ. SBN 251488
daniel@gaineslawfirm.com
ALEX P. KATOFSKY, ESQ. SBN 202754
alex@gaineslawfirm.com
GAINES & GAINES, APLC
21550 Oxnard Street, Suite 980
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Telephone: (818) 703-8985
Facsimile: (818) 703-8984
7
Attorneys for Plaintiff DANNY McCRARY
8
RONALD W. BROWN, ESQ. SBN 107340
rbrown@cookbrown.com
CARRIE E. BUSHMAN, ESQ. SBN 18613
cbushman@cookbrown.com
MEG E. WILSON, ESQ. SBN 278386
mwilson@cookbrown.com
COOK BROWN, LLP
Telephone:
(916) 442-3100
Facsimile:
(916) 442-4277
2
3
4
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
Attorneys for Defendant
CAMBELL SOUP SUPPLY COMPANY, L.L.C.
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
18
19
DANNY McCRARY, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated, and on
behalf of the general public,
Plaintiffs,
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case No.: 2:13-cv-01332-GEB-KJN
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING FILING OF
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
v.
CAMPBELL SOUP SUPPLY COMPANY
L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability
company, and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive,
Defendants.
26
27
28
STIP. AND ORDER REGARDING FILING
OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
Case No.: 2:13-cv-01332-GEB-KJN
1
RECITALS
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A.
WHEREAS, DANNY McCRARY ("Plaintiff ") filed his Original Complaint
in San Joaquin County Superior Court on June 3, 2013;
B.
WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) in San
Joaquin County Superior Court on June 27, 2013;
C.
WHEREAS, on or about July 3, 2013, Defendant removed the action to this
D.
WHEREAS, Defendant answered the First Amended Complaint on July 23,
E.
WHEREAS, Defendants contend that Plaintiff improperly named a non-
Court;
2013;
employing entity as an additional defendant in the action;
F.
WHEREAS, following confirmatory discovery, the parties have agreed to
permit Plaintiff to file a Second Amended Complaint (SAC) which dismisses defendant Campbell
Soup Company from the action and adds a claim for failure to pay wages due at separation pursuant
to Labor Code §§ 201-203. The proposed SAC (with redline changes from the FAC) is attached
hereto as Exhibit A.
THEREFORE, the parties do STIPULATE AND AGREE as follows;
1.
Plaintiff’s SAC shall be the operative complaint in this matter;
2.
Plaintiff’s SAC shall be deemed filed upon entry of the Order on this
Stipulation; and
3.
Defendant shall have thirty (30) days to respond to the SAC, to commence
upon entry of this Order.
IT IS SO STIPULATED:
25
26
27
28
STIP. FOR CONTINUANCE OF CMC;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
2.
Case No.: 2:13-cv-01332-GEB-KJN
1
Dated: October 2, 2013
2
/s/ Alex P. Katofsky
ALEX P. KATOFSKY
GAINES & GAINES, APLC
Attorneys for Plaintiff DANNY McCRARY
3
4
5
6
Dated: October 2, 2013
7
/s/ Carrie E. Bushman
CARRIE E. BUSHMAN
COOK BROWN, LLP
Attorneys for Defendant
CAMPBELL SOUP SUPPLY COMPANY
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
ORDER
Upon reading the forgoing Stipulation, and good cause appearing, therefore,
IT IS ORDERED THAT
1.
Plaintiff’s SAC shall be the operative complaint in this matter;
2.
Plaintiff’s SAC shall be deemed filed upon entry of the Order on this
Stipulation; and
3.
Defendant shall have thirty (30) days to respond to the SAC, to commence
upon entry of this Order.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 2, 2013
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP. FOR CONTINUANCE OF CMC;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
3.
Case No.: 2:13-cv-01332-GEB-KJN
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?