Probuilders Specialty Insurance Company, RRG v. Valley Corp. B. et al

Filing 171

ORDER Granting 170 Stipulation (1) Referring the Matter to a Settlement Judge (2) Continuing the Hearing on Motion for De Novo Determination of Dispositive Matter (3) Keeping Probuilders Pending Motion for Summary Judgment Under Submission Until the Completion of the Settlement Conference. Pursuant to ADR Local Rule 7-2, this case is referred to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley for a settlement conference to occur no later than April 30, 2013.The court schedules this case for a Stat us Conference on May 10, 2013, at 10:00a.m. On or before May 3, 2013, the parties shall file a Joint Status ConferenceStatement which provides, inter alia, an update on the status of the case and the need to reschedule any case deadlines. The hearing on the Motion for De Novo Review of Magistrate's Recommendation is VACATED and will be rescheduled at the Status Conference if necessary. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 1/30/2013.(ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2013)

(.

1
2
3
4
5
6

GEORGE D. YARON, ESQ. (State Bar #96246)
JAMES I SILVERSTEIN, ESQ. (StateBar#I43543J
gyaron(alyaronlaw.com;[e-mail]

YARON & ASSOCIATES

601 California St, 21 51 Floor
San Francisco, California 94108
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Attorneys for Plaintiff
PROBUILDERS SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, RRG

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11 PROBUILDERS SPECIALTY INSURANCE)
COMPANY, RRG, a District of Columbia, Risk)
12 Retention Group,
)
)
13
Plaintiff,
)
)

14
15
16
17
18
19

v.

)
)
VALLEY CORP. B., a California Corporation)
formerlyknownasR.J. HAAS CORP.; RONALD)
J. HAAS, an individual; TY LEVINE, an)
individual; KAREN LEVINE, an individual; )
SAClll ADAClll, an individual,; TATSUKO)
ADAClll, an individual; and R.J. HAAS)
CONSTRUCTION CORP., a California)
Corporation,
)
)
Defendants.
)

CASE N0.:5: 10-cv-05533-EJD

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER (1) REFERRING THE
MATTER TO A SETTLEMENT
JUDGE; (2) CONTINUING THE
HEARING ON RONALD J. HAAS'
MOTION FOR DE NOVO
DETERMINATION OF DISPOSITIVE
MATTER REFERRED TO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE UNTIL AFTER
THE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE;
AND (3) KEEPING PROBUILDERS'
PENDING MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT UNDER SUBMISSION
UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF THE
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

20
21
22
23
Plaintiff

ProBuilders

Specialty

Insurance

Company,

RRG

("ProBuilders"),

24
Defendant/Counter-Claimants Ronald J. Haas ("Haas"), and Ty and Karen Levine ("Levines")
25
(collectively "Parties"), by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby stipulate as
26
follows:
27
28

Stip. ReSettlement Conference

G:\3299\Plending.s\Stip.Extcnd.Discovery\Stipulntionremediution.wpd

I.

1

Pursuant to ADR Local Rule 7-2, the Parties hereby request that the Court refer this

2 matter to a Settlement Conference. Given the involvement of Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd and
3 Judge Edward Davila in the instant action, the Parties request that the Settlement Conference be
4 conducted by any District Court Judge or Magistrate Judge, other than Magistrate Judge Lloyd or
5 Judge Davila.
2.

6

The Parties believe that it would be beneficial ifthe Settlement Conference took place

7 prior to the resolution of two matters now pending before the Court. These two matters are (1)
8 Ronald J. Haas' Motion for De Novo Determination of Dispositive Matter ("Motion for De Novo
9 Determination"), which is currently set for hearing on February 8, 2012 [Docket No. 163], and (2)
10 ProBuilders Specialty Insurance Company, RRG's Motion for Summary Judgment, or, in the
11

alternative, Motion for Partial Summary Judgment ("Motion for Summary Judgment"), which the

12 Court has taken under submission. [Docket No. 128.]

The Parties believe that there would be a

13 better chance of settling this lawsuit, if the parties did not know the outcome of (1) the Motion for
14 De Novo Determination, and (2) the Motion for Summary Judgment at the time of the Settlement
15 Conference.

3.

16

Therefore, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree that this matter will be scheduled for

17 a Settlement Conference. The hearing date on the Motion for De Novo Determination will be
18 continued to a date after the completion of the Settlement Conference. Moreover, the Court will
19 keep the Motion for Summary Judgment under submission until, at least, the completion of the
20 Settlement Conference.
21

Ill

22

Ill

23

Ill

24

Ill

25

Ill

26

Ill

27

Ill

28

Ill
2

Slip. Rc Settlement Conference

G:\3299\Piendings\Stip.Extcnd.Discovery\Stipulutionrcmedintion.wpd

4.

1

This Stipulation will not alter the date of any other event or any other deadline already

2 fixed by Court Order.
3

4
5
6

7 Dated:

~j :JA,.._//)JJ/J
ON, ESQ.
J
SS
RSTEIN, ESQ.
Attorney for Plaintiff/Counter"Defendant

8
9

PROB~DERSSPECU\LTY~S~CE

COMPANY

10
11

SILICON VALLEY LAW GROUP, ALC

12
13

Dated:

14

KIM DINCEL, ESQ.
JULIE ROGERS, ESQ.
CHRISTOPHER LAI, ESQ.
Attorneys for Defendants/Counter"Claimants
TY LEVINE, KAREN LEVINE, and
RONALD J. HAAS

15

16
17

18
19 PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Pursuant to ADR Local Rule 7-2, this case is referred to Magistrate Judge
Jacqueline Scott Corley for a settlement conference to occur no later than April
30, 2013. The parties shall contact Judge Corley's courtroom deputy to arrange a date.
The court schedules this case for a Status Conference on May 10, 2013, at 10:00
a.m. On or before May 3, 2013, the parties UNITED STATES Status Conference
shall file a Joint DISTRICT JUDGE
Statement which provides, inter alia, an update on theJ.status of the case and the
EDWARD DAVILA
need to reschedule any case deadlines.
The hearing on the Motion for De Novo Review of Magistrate's Recommendation is
VACATED and will be rescheduled at the Status Conference if necessary.
DATED: January 30, 2013

_____________________________
EDWARD J. DAVILA
___________________________
United States District Judge
EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge

3
Stip. Re Settlement Conference

0:\3299\Pieudings\Stip.Extcnd.Discovery\Stipulntionremcd intion. wpd