Convey-Hinzo v. Asbestos Defendants et al

Filing 136

ORDER GRANTING SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY by Hon. William Alsup granting 131 Motion to Substitute Attorney for ITT Corporation(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/6/2015)

Download PDF
~AO 154 (10/0~) S11bA!IMioa of Auom~y UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHEHN Distl'ict of CALIFORNIA IndividuallY' e~nd GIS su9c9~aor ---------------In Interest !o GILBERT~. HINZO, Oeceaeed, ALEX HINZO, E~n Individual, and FELICIA WATSON, an Individual, CONSENT ORDER G~ANTXNG 'fJA'fRIOIA J. coVEY·HINZO l'laintiff(s), v. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS, et al. S1JBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY CASE NUMD.IDRt 3:16·QV~00241-LB Defendant (.~), Notioo Js hemby given that, subject to H.pproval by the com·~ ~mbs~irutes ITT QOREORATIQN (Pnrly (s) NPniO) JOSEPH DUFFY /AMY TALARICO/ MICHAEL Q, EAGAN, JR. , State Bnt No. 241864/ 209112/276823 as oouns~l ofl'ecord In (Namu of New i\ltomoy) plaou of ~ENNETH B. PRINDLE /OAR LA LYNN CROCHET/JERq~Y D. M!LBRODT, of PRINDLE, AMI\f30, GO§IZ. HILL'(8,.RO. & RTIINROLTZ, L[J3, 310 Gold Shore Parkway, Fourth Floor, Long Beach, California 90802 (Nt~me of Attorney(s) Wilhdrawlng Appearance) Contact tnfonnacl on .fbr riew counsel is as follows: Firm Nnme: MORGAN, L!~WIS & BOCKIUS U.P ·,, Address: ONE MARKET, SPEAR Sl"RF:ETTOW8R, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94106 Tele~~onq: · (415} 442~1000 Facshnile ,..__<.~4..;,.:16:t...)..:.44..:.::2:...:~1:.;..00:...:1:.,...,...._________ E·Mn!l (Optional): ...... I consent to the above Sol-!bstitution. D ute: Juno r_.; A t;:;;;;t';;;l; 20j 5 1 oo.nseut to being S\Jbatitnted, Dat~: June Z~, 2016 (Slgnnntrc of Ponnar Attorney (s)) ~ l consent to the nbove substitution • Date; . ~una 23,.,, 2Qj 5 ..... The substitution of attomey is hereby approved and so ORDERED. Date: July 6, 2015. Jndgc [Note: A separate consent ol'der of substitution must be: filed by each new nttorney wishing to enter an nppearnnco.]

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?