Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union Welfare Fund et al v. Kephart & Corti Productions, Inc. et al

Filing 60

ORDER Denying 57 Motion to Reconsider Oral Motion to Show Cause. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 1/4/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION
WELFARE FUND, et al.,

)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
)
KEPHART & CORTI PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
)
et al.,
)
)
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:09-cv-02043-GMN-PAL
ORDER
(Mot to Reconsider - Dkt. #57)

Before the court is Plaintiffs Motion to Reconsider Oral Motion to Show Cause (Dkt. #57). The
court has considered the Motion, and Defendant Robert Kephart’s Opposition (Dkt. #59).

16

Having reviewed and considered the moving and responsive papers and attached exhibits, the

17

court is not satisfied that the judgment debtor was properly served with proper notice of the judgment

18

debtor examination the court ordered, and the order scheduling the judgment debtor examination of

19

Robert Kephart as the person most knowledgeable for the Comedy Stop, and order for production of

20

documents.

21

The orders were served, according to Plaintiffs’ Certificate of Service (Dkt. #56) by United

22

States Mail to various individuals and parties. The law firm of Gordon & Silver was served by mail.

23

Gordon & Silver made an appearance in this action and is still counsel of record. However, Gordon &

24

Silver represent that the firm resigned as Kephart & Corti Production, Inc.’s resident agent as of

25

February 23, 2011. Additionally, Eric Olson of Gordon & Silver sent Plaintiffs’ counsel a letter on July

26

29, 2011, explaining: (1) that he had not appeared in this action and was not Mr. Kephart’s counsel of

27

record; (2) that Gordon & Silver had resigned as Kephart & Corti’s resident agent months earlier; (3)

28

that regular mail, especially to a post office box is ineffective for service on an order concerning a

1

judgment debtor examination; (4) that it was improper to attempt to have Mr. Kephart compelled to

2

come to Nevada as he lived in New Jersey; and (5) that Plaintiffs could not unilaterally designate Mr.

3

Kephart as Kephart & Corti’s Rule 30(b)(6) designee, as the rule permits the corporation to designate

4

its Rule 30(b)(6) designee.

5

Having reviewed and considered the matter,

6

IT IS ORDERED Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider Oral Motion to Show Cause (Dkt. #57) is

7
8

DENIED.
Dated this 4th day of January, 2012.

9
10
11

______________________________________
Peggy A. Leen
United States Magistrate Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2