Forte Capital Partners, LLC v. Harris Cramer LLP et al

Filing 352

ORDER Re 350 Joint Letter of February 18, 2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/3/2010. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/3/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. HARRIS CRAMER, LLP, et al., Defendants. ___________________________________/ FORTE CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, Plaintiff, No. C-07-1237 EMC ORDER RE JOINT LETTER OF FEBRUARY 18, 2010 (Docket No. 350) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

On February 18, 2010, the parties submitted a joint letter regarding their continuing dispute over costs owed to vendors. Having reviewed the joint letter, as well as Forte's subsequent letter of March 1, 2010, the Court hereby rules as follows. (1) Based on the joint letter, it appears that the parties have reached a resolution with

respect to the following vendors: Dan Mottaz Video; S&R Services; Summit Court Reporting; Conference Call America; Quest Discovery Services; McCorkle Video; and Quality Control Documents. (2) With respect to each of the following vendors, Forte shall provide a declaration

certifying that the vendor confirmed that no additional monies are owed and/or that the payment made by Forte was accepted as payment in full: Advanced Attorney Services; Ivize; Lyon Reporting; and Once Source Delivery Service. The declaration shall be filed within a week of the date of this order. The Court emphasizes that the declaration must be submitted under penalty of perjury and forewarns Forte that, should any of these vendors subsequently seek payment from

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

TTLG with respect to services provided to Forte (including interest or late charges), the Court may require Forte to indemnify TTLG should TTLG pay any of the monies sought to the vendors. (3) With respect to Regus, Forte shall provide a declaration certifying that the vendor

agreed to a payment plan and that, once all payments are made pursuant to the plan, there are no additional monies to be paid by Forte to the vendor. The declaration shall be filed within a week of the date of this order. (4) With respect to Grossman & Cotter, the Court is satisfied that, based on the e-mail

correspondence between Forte and Grossman & Cotter, the vendor agreed to a payment plan. See Joint letter, Ex. 4. (5) The joint letter indicates that issues remain unresolved with respect to the costs owed

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

to Atkinson Baker and Video Depositions. The Court orders the parties to file a joint letter within a week of the date of this order providing an update as to the costs owed to these vendors. If Forte takes the position that the vendors have not been cooperative (e.g., by not returning telephone calls), then it shall provide a declaration providing specific facts as to the efforts made to work with the vendors to resolve any dispute over costs.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2010 _________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States Magistrate Judge

2