Moura v. American West Steamboat Company L.L.C.

Filing 44

ORDER RE DECLARATION OF ILSE M. BUTTERFIELD TO RATIFY PLEADINGS. Signed by Judge Alsup on April 6, 2009. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/6/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 CLARABELLE MOURA, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN WEST STEAMBOAT COMPANY LLC, d/b/a MAJESTIC AMERICA LINE, and DOES 1 to 100, Defendants. / ORDER RE DECLARATION OF ILSE M. BUTTERFIELD TO RATIFY PLEADINGS No. C 08-04025 WHA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 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

At the last hearing, Attorney Butterfield was ordered, as a result of her snafus concerning admission to practice, to file a declaration to ratify her prior statements and filings. She has filed a subsequent declaration now that she is admitted to practice in this district. She represented at the original hearing that she had served initial disclosures. However, in her recent declaration, she did not mention anything to do with her initial disclosures under Rule 26. Attorney Wootton, in response, points out this omission and states affirmatively that no initial disclosures were ever provided. Attorney Butterfield is ordered to state, under oath, with specificity by NOON ON FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 2009, when, if ever, she served initial disclosures under Rule 26. Both sides should be aware that Rule 26 does not require production of evidentiary documents but does require disclosure of the category of documents to be relied upon as well as

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

other information. Be further aware that under Rule 37(c) failure to comply with the initial disclosures requirements can lead to preclusion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 6, 2009

WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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 2