Pinchuk v. CIT Bank et al
Filing
90
ORDER granting 86 Motion to Substitute Attorney. Attorney Brian C. Vanderhoof is substituted in place and stead of Jacob D Bundick. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 3/27/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
Case 2:16-cv-02986-RFB-GWF Document 86 Filed 03/26/18 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
BRIAN C. VANDERHOOF (10463)
LECLAIRRYAN LLP
725 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 350
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel: 213-488-0503
Email: Brian.Vanderhoof@leclairryan.com
DAVID V. WILSON II (10278)
MEHAFFY WEBER PC
400 South 4th Street, Suite 500
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Tel: 702-448.7981
Email: DavidWilson@mehaffyweber.com
Attorneys for Defendant
CIT BANK, N.A.
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
STATE OF NEVADA
13
14
STEVEN G. PINCHUCK,
Plaintiff,
15
16
17
18
19
Case No:
2:16-cv-02986-RFB-GWF
Hon. Richard F. Boulware
vs.
CIT BANK, N.A.; and EQUIFAX, INC.,
SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY
Defendants.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY
2:16-cv-02986-RFB-GWF
Case 2:16-cv-02986-RFB-GWF Document 86 Filed 03/26/18 Page 2 of 2
1
Defendant CIT BANK, N.A. hereby substitutes Brian C. Vanderhoof of
2
LeClairRyan LLP, 725 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 350, Los Angeles, California
3
90017; Telephone: (213) 488-0503 attorneys of record in place and stead of Jacob
4
D. Bundick of Greenberg Traurig, LLP.
5
DATED: March 26, 2018
6
/s/ Rebecca Marks
7
Rebecca Marks for CIT Bank, N.A.
8
9
10
I consent to the above substitution.
11
DATED: March 26, 2018
12
/s/ Jacob D. Bundick
13
Jacob D. Bundick, Esq.
14
15
I am duly admitted to practice in this District.
16
Above substitution accepted.
17
DATED: March 26, 2018
18
/s/ Brian C. Vanderhoof
19
Brian C. Vanderhoof, Esq.
20
21
Please check one: ____ RETAINED, or _____ APPOINTED BY THE COURT
22
23
24
APPROVED:
March ___, 2018
DATED: _______27
25
26
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
27
28
2
SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY
2:16-cv-02986-RFB-GWF
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?