Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation v. Charter Connection Corporation et al

Filing 9

ORDER denying #3 Ex Parte Motion for Order Appointing Substitute Custodian: Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Order Appointing Substitute Custodian and Order Authorizing Movement and Inspection of Defendant Vessel is Denied Without Prejudice to refiling it with the requisite support. Signed by Judge M. James Lorenz on 5/3/2007. (mjj, )(mam).

Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation v. Charter Connection Corporation et al

Doc. 9

Case 3:07-cv-00767-L-NLS

Document 9

Filed 05/03/2007

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION, 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 CHARTER CONNECTION 14 CORPORATION, in Personam, PETE TERREBONNE, in Personam, PAMELA 15 TERREBONNE, in Personam, and BELLE AMIE, O.N. 1170780, its 16 Engines, Machinery, Appurtenances, etc., in Rem, 17 Defendants. 18 19 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil No. 07cv767-L(NLS) ORDER DENYING EX PARTE MOTION FOR ORDER APPOINTING SUBSTITUTE CUSTODIAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On April 26, 2007 Plaintiff filed an Ex Parte Motion for Order Appointing Substitute

20 Custodian and Order Authorizing Movement and Inspection of Defendant Vessel. The motion is 21 denied for several reasons. 22 First, the Certification of Robert McKee is made on information and belief only. Since

23 the certification pertains to Mr. McKee's qualifications, services, insurance and similar matters, 24 as well as the price for his services, there appears to be no reason why the certification should 25 not be made based on first hand knowledge. Furthermore, it is unclear whether moorage is 26 included in, or additional to, the price for Mr. McKee's services. Last, the findings stated in the 27 proposed order, which Plaintiff proposes the court make, specifically with respect to the 28 substitute custodian insurance and the price of substitute custodian's services relative to the cost
07cv767

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:07-cv-00767-L-NLS

Document 9

Filed 05/03/2007

Page 2 of 2

1 of the United States Marshal for the same services differ from, or are not supported by, the 2 motion or the accompanying certification. 3 Accordingly, Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Order Appointing Substitute Custodian and

4 Order Authorizing Movement and Inspection of Defendant Vessel is DENIED WITHOUT 5 PREJUDICE to refiling it with the requisite support. 6 7 8 DATED: May 3, 2007 9 10 11 COPY TO: 12 HON. NITA L. STORMES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 ALL PARTIES/COUNSEL 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
2
07cv767

IT IS SO ORDERED.

M. James Lorenz United States District Court Judge