Contreras v. JP Morgan Chase Bank et al

Filing 50

ORDER RE DEFENDANT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK N.A.'S MOTION TO VACATE ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER OF JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Alsup on May 20, 2010. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/20/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NELIDA CONTRERAS, Plaintiff, v. JP MORGAN CHASE FKA WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, NOEMI NUNEZ, WAMU EMPLOYEE NO. 2, GARCIA MARKETING, LLC, HENRY GARCIA, FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, a corporation, RECEIVER FOR WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, Defendants. / ORDER RE DEFENDANT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK N.A.'S MOTION TO VACATE ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER OF JUDGMENT No. C 09-03176 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 On May 19, 2010, plaintiff filed an acceptance of defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.'s Rule 68 offer of judgment in this matter. On May 20, 2010, defendant JPMorgan Chase filed a notice asserting that the acceptance was invalid because the Rule 68 offer had already been revoked based on inadvertence, mistake, and fraud. In particular, defendant JPMorgan Chase asserts that it had informed plaintiff that the offer was contingent on plaintiff's dismissal of defendants David Ristedt and Noemi Nunez in both this lawsuit and a nearly identical lawsuit in California state court. In light of the dispute regarding the validity of plaintiff's acceptance of the Rule 68 offer of judgment, the meet-and-confer and discovery hearing previously scheduled for May 21, 2010, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 shall remain on calendar. A briefing schedule on a hearing on defendant JPMorgan Chase's motion to vacate acceptance of the offer of judgment shall be set at the May 21 hearing. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 20, 2010. 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

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?