Newson v. United Parcel Service

Filing 26

ORDER appointing counsel. Harmeet K. Dhillon & John-Paul S. Deol; Dhillon & Smith LLP, 177 Post Street, Suite 700, San Francisco, CA 94108, Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 4/28/14. (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/28/2014) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/28/2014: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tfS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LAMAR NEWSON, Plaintiff(s), vs. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE Defendant(s). ) ) ) Case Number: 13-5199 SI ) ) ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL ) ) ) ) Because the plaintiff has requested and is in need of counsel to assist him in this matter and a volunteer attorney is willing to be appointed to undertake this representation at the request of the Federal Pro Bono Project, Harmeet K. Dhillon and John-Paul S. Deol are hereby appointed as counsel for Lamar Newson in this matter. The scope of this referral shall be for: all purposes for the duration of the case the limited purpose of representing the litigant in the course of mediation early neutral evaluation settlement conference briefing and hearing on the following motion (e.g., motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss): __________________________________________________________ discovery as follows: __________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ other: __________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ All proceedings in this action are hereby stayed until four weeks from the date of this order. Counsel shall be familiar with General Order No. 25 and the Federal Pro Bono Project Guidelines posted on the Court’s website. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 4/28/14 United States District Judge EXHIBIT D TO FEDERAL PRO BONO PROJECT GUIDELINES EXHIBIT D TO FEDERAL PRO BONO PROJECT GUIDELINES

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?