Mabey Inc. v. MCM Construction, Inc. et al

Filing 19

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/16/16 ORDERING that this case is STAYED for 60 calendar days, through 02/14/17. (Benson, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 M URPHY A USTIN A DAMS S CHOENFEL D LLP 10 D. MICHAEL SCHOENFELD, SBN 102332 J. SCOTT ALEXANDER, SBN 190034 MIKHAIL PARNES MURPHY AUSTIN ADAMS SCHOENFELD LLP 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 850 Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: (916) 446-2300 Facsimile: (916) 503-4000 Email: mschoenfeld@murphyaustin.com Email: salexander@murphyaustin.com Email: mparnes@murphyaustin.com Attorneys for Defendants MCM CONSTRUCTION, INC., A. TEICHERT & SON, INC. d/b/a TEICHERT CONSTRUCTION, TEICHERT/MCM, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, and TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 14 MABEY INC., a Maryland corporation, Case No. 2:16-cv-02639-JAM-DB 15 Plaintiff, 16 JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS FOR SIXTY (60) DAYS v. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 MCM CONSTRUCTION, INC., a California corporation, CITY OF TRACY, CALIFORNIA, TEICHERT/MCM, a California joint venture, A.TEICHERT & SON, INC. d/b/a TEICHERT CONSTRUCTION, a California corporation, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a Massachusetts corporation, and TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, a Connecticut corporation, Defendants. 24 25 26 The undersigned counsel, representing Plaintiff Mabey Inc. and the Defendants named in 27 the action, hereby jointly stipulate to a limited stay of proceedings for a period of sixty (60) 28 calendar days, through February 14, 2017. The stay is needed to allow the parties to engage in -1- 1280.006-2290388.1 STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS FOR SIXTY (60) DAYS 2:16-CV-02639-JAM-DB WDC-63357-1 1 settlement discussions. Plaintiff Mabey Inc. and Defendant MCM Construction, Inc., have 2 executed an agreement requiring MCM Construction, Inc. to make certain payments to Mabey 3 over the next 60 days and have agreed to an in-person meeting for the specific purpose of 4 negotiating a final resolution. The Parties are optimistic that a final settlement will be achieved. 5 A stay of the pending litigation would facilitate the settlement because it would allow the parties 6 to limit their expenditure of attorney’s fees and costs addressing the requirements of the litigation 7 while settlement negotiations are underway. 8 9 M URPHY A USTIN A DAMS S CHOENFEL D LLP 10 The Parties have agreed that any party may request to lift the stay of proceedings after giving at least seven calendar days written notice to counsel for the other parties. Upon the expiration of the stay of proceedings, whether by the passage of time or order of 11 the Court, Defendants shall have ten business days from the cessation of the stay to file any 12 responsive pleadings. IT IS SO STIPULATED. 13 14 15 Dated: December 16, 2016 Dated: December 16, 2016 16 __/S/________________________________________ BRIAN P. WAAGNER Attorney for Plaintiff MABEY INC. OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF TRACY By:___/S/____________________________________ BILL SARTOR City Attorney Attorney for Defendant CITY OF TRACY 17 18 19 20 Dated: December 16, 2016 MURPHY AUSTIN ADAMS SCHOENFELD LLP 21 By: /s/ D. MICHAEL SCHOENFELD J. SCOTT ALEXANDER MIKHAIL PARNES Attorneys for Defendants MCM CONSTRUCTION, INC., A. TEICHERT & SON, INC. d/b/a TEICHERT CONSTRUCTION, TEICHERT/MCM, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, and TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- 1280.006-2290388.1 STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS FOR SIXTY (60) DAYS 2:16-CV-02639-JAM-DB WDC-63357-1 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 3 4 Dated: 12/16/ 2016 /s/ John A. Mendez____________________ Hon. John A. Mendez, District Court Judge 5 6 7 8 9 M URPHY A USTIN A DAMS S CHOENFEL D LLP 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3- 1280.006-2290388.1 STIPULATION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS FOR SIXTY (60) DAYS 2:16-CV-02639-JAM-DB WDC-63357-1

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?