Parker v. Langemeier et al

Filing 25

ORDER Amended Complaint deadline: 2/12/2013. Should plaintiff fail to file amended complaint, defendants' pending motion to dismiss shall stand submitted. Please see attached for further details. Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 1/22/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

STEVEN E. PARKER,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
LORAL LANGEMEIER, WILLIAM MATTOX, )
MANNA PROPERTIES, LLC, and AR
)
RESIDENTIAL RESTORATION, INC.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_________________________________ )

3:12-cv-00429-HDM-VPC
ORDER

19
Defendants have filed a partial motion to dismiss (#11).
20
Plaintiff has opposed (#15), and defendants have replied (#17).
21
In his complaint filed on August 14, 2012, plaintiff Steven
22
Parker (“plaintiff”) asserts that defendants failed to pay two
23
promissory notes upon their maturity in 2008, one made to defendant
24
Manna Properties (“Manna”) and the other made to defendant AR
25
Residential Restoration, Inc. (“AR”).

Defendants William Mattox

26
(“Mattox”) and Loral Langemeier (“Langemeier”) are alleged to be
27
managers of Manna; Langemeier is additionally alleged to be the
28
1

1

president of AR.

2

breach of contract as to the Manna note; (2) breach of guaranty as

3

to the Manna note; (3) breach of contract as to the AR note; (4)

4

fraudulent inducement as to both notes; and (5) promissory estoppel

5

as to both notes.

6

fraudulent inducement and promissory estoppel as insufficiently

7

pled and all claims asserted against the individual defendants on

8

the basis that they are not personally liable for payment of the

9

notes.

10

The complaint asserts five causes of action: (1)

Defendants move to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims of

While plaintiff opposes defendants’ motion, he also requests

11

leave to amend his complaint to the extent it is deficient.

12

Accordingly, plaintiff shall have up to and including February 12,

13

2013, in which to file an amended complaint to assert any claim of

14

alter ego, to plead a basis for his breach of guaranty claim, and

15

to set forth the “the who, what, when, where, and how of the

16

misconduct charged” in his fraudulent inducement and promissory

17

estoppel claims.

18

998 (9th Cir. 2010).

19

complaint by February 12, 2013, the defendants’ pending motion to

20

dismiss shall stand submitted.

See Ebeid ex rel. U.S. v. Lungwitz, 616 F.3d 993,
Should the plaintiff fail to file an amended

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22

DATED: This 22nd day of January, 2013.

23
24

____________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25
26
27
28
2