Daugherty v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston
Filing
17
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 16 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Private ADR by Cathleen Daugherty filed by Cathleen Daugherty. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on August 12, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2016)
Reset Form
Reset Form
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Cathleen Daugherty
,
CASE No C
16-cv-02714 JST
Plaintiff(s)
v.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS
Liberty Life Assurance Company
,
Defendant(s)
Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the following
stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5. The parties agree to participate in the
following ADR process:
Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) (ADR L.R. 5)
Mediation (ADR L.R. 6)
■
Private ADR (specify process and provider)
Mediation with Vivien Williamson on October
3, 2016.
Note: Magistrate judges do not conduct
mediations under ADR L.R. 6. To request an
early settlement conference with a Magistrate
Judge, you must file a Notice of Need for
ADR Phone Conference. Do not use this
form. See Civil Local Rule 16-8 and ADR
L.R. 3-5.
The parties agree to hold the ADR session by:
■
the presumptive deadline (90 days from the date of the order referring the case to ADR,
unless otherwise ordered. )
other requested deadline:
Date:
August 5, 2016
Date:
August 5, 2016
/s/ P. Randall Noah
Attorney for Plaintiff
/s/ Norman Lau
Attorney for Defendant
X IT IS SO ORDERED
IT IS SO ORDERED WITH MODIFICATIONS:
Print Form
Print Form
Date: August 12, 2016
U.S. DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE
HON. JON S. TIGAR
Important! E-file this form in ECF using the appropriate event among these choices: “Stipulation & Proposed Order
Selecting Mediation” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting ENE” or “Stipulation & Proposed Order Selecting
Private ADR.”
Form ADR-Stip rev. 7-2016
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?