Diane Schroeder et al v. Stephen Hundley et al

Filing 73

ORDER Denying 72 Defendant Jason Chappell's Motion to Continue. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 2/23/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13

DIANE SCHROEDER, an individual,
AND EQUITY TRUST COMPANY
CUSTODIAN FBO DIANE
SCHROEDER IRA,

Case No.: 17-CV-919 JLS (LL)
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT
JASON CHAPPELL’S MOTION
TO CONTINUE

Plaintiffs,

14
15

v.

16

STEPHEN HUNDLEY; JASON
CHAPPELL; AND DISTRESSED
ACQUISITIONS,

17
18
19

(ECF No. 72)

Defendants.

20

Presently before the Court is Defendant Jason Chappell’s Motion to Continue

21

(“Mot.,” ECF No. 72). Per the Motion, “Defendant Jason Chappell respectfully requests a

22

90 day continuance, and if the CoronaVirus Pandemic continues, Jason Chappell will need

23

further time to economically recover along with health wise recover,” id. at 2, although it

24

is unclear from the Motion precisely what Defendant Chappell requests the Court to

25

continue. See generally id. The hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment was

26

calendared for February 18, 2021, see ECF No. 69, although the hearing was vacated on

27

February 16, 2021, see ECF No. 70—the same date Defendant Chappell sent his Motion,

28

although it was not received by the Court until February 22, 2021, see generally Mot.
1
17-CV-919 JLS (LL)

1

As the Court noted in its last Order granting in part a similar motion filed by

2

Defendant Chappell, “Defendant Chappell has made numerous appeals to the Court on

3

account of his poor health and finances and hopes to retain counsel” seeking various

4

continuances. ECF No. 63 at 1 (citing ECF Nos. 20, 46 at 3–4); see also ECF No. 62. That

5

Order further warned Defendant Chappell that “[t]he Court will not allow resolution of this

6

action to be delayed indefinitely; consequently, absent extraordinary circumstances, no

7

further extensions or continuances shall be granted.” ECF No. 63 at 2 (emphasis in

8

original).

9

circumstances meriting further delay of the resolution of this action, which has been

10
11
12

In his Motion, Defendant Chappell has not identified any extraordinary

pending for nearly four years. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the Motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 23, 2021

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
17-CV-919 JLS (LL)