Smith et al v. Leichtman et al
Filing
343
ORDER GRANTING 342 Notice of Substitution of Counsel. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 2/10/15. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/10/2015)
Case3:10-cv-00010-JSW Document342-1 Filed02/09/15 Page1 of 3
1 Scott M. Pearson (SBN 173880)
pearsons@ballardspahr.com
2 BALLARD SPAHR LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 800
3 Los Angeles, CA 90067-2909
Telephone: 424.204.4400
4 Facsimile: 424.204.4350
5 Attorneys for Defendants
LEVINE LEICHTMAN CAPITAL
6 PARTNERS, INC. and LEVINE
LEICHTMAN CAPITAL PARTNERS
7 III, L.P.
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
10
11 CHRISTINA SMITH, ASHLEY
HENDERSON, JANA SPERLING,
12 ESTATE OF TONI NEILSON, JESSICA
SHOUSE, ALBERT LACHOWICZ ex
13 rel, JENNIFER PACZAN, and AMY
LINDE, on their own behalf and on
14 behalf of others similarly situated,
[Assigned to the Hon. Jeffrey S. White]
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY
Plaintiff,
15
16
CASE NO. 3:10-cv-00010 JSW
v.
17 LEVINE LEICHTMAN CAPITAL
PARTNERS, INC., LEVINE
18 LEICHTMAN CAPITAL PARTNERS
III, LP., and LEVINE LEICHTMAN
19 CAPITAL PARTNERS III, LLC,
MICHAEL SCHRECK, BRETT
20 STOHLTON and NATIONAL
CORRECTIVE GROUP, INC (dba
21 ‘Corrective Solutions),
Defendants.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DMWEST #11772063 v1
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY
Case3:10-cv-00010-JSW Document342-1 Filed02/09/15 Page2 of 3
ORDER
1
2
Pursuant to the Notice of Substitution of Attorney, it is hereby ORDERED
3 that the law firm of Ballard Spahr LLP is substituted as counsel of record for
4 defendants Levine Leichtman Capital Partners, Inc.; and Levine Capital Partners III,
5 L.P.
6
10
DATED: Februrary __, 2015
7
Hon. Jeffrey S. White
United States District Court Judge
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DMWEST #11772063 v1
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY
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?