San Francisco Residence Club, Inc et al v. Amado et al
Filing
256
SECOND AMENDED JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 8/4/2014. (tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/4/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
Northern District of California
United States District Court
11
SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENCE CLUB,
et al.,
12
Case No.: 09-2054 RS (JSC)
AMENDED JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs,
13
v.
14
15
HENRY A. AMADO, JR., et al.,
16
Defendants.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Court having granted Plaintiffs’ Motion to Enforce Settlement by Order dated June
11, 2012, having entered judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants on the same
date, and having granted Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion to amend the judgment on August 27,
2012, enters judgment in favor of Plaintiff Donahue O’Shea LLC and against Defendants Henry
A. Amado, Jr., Edward S. Broda, Gregory Fish and G.D. Fish Associates, Inc. jointly and
severally, in the total amount of $41,666.00. The Court also enters judgment in the additional
amount of $1,250.00 in favor of Plaintiff Donahue O’Shea LLC and against Defendants Henry
//
//
//
1
2
A. Amado, Jr. and Edward S. Broda, jointly and severally.
In addition to the above amount, the Court having granted Plaintiff’s motion to further
3
amend the judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants Edward S. Broda, Aspire
4
Investments, Inc. and Aspire Real Estate, Inc., by Order filed August 4, 2014, enters judgment in
5
favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants Edward S. Broda, Aspire Investments, Inc. and Aspire
6
Real Estate, Inc., jointly and severally, in the amount of $150,000.00.
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 4, 2014
_________________________________
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
9
10
Northern District of California
United States District Court
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?