Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Board of Trustees v. Robert Beadles, Inc., 4:09-cv-02557-PJH (KAW). (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20151130c20 Visitors: 1
Filed: Nov. 25, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 25, 2015
Summary: [PROPOSED] AMENDED ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION OF DEBTOR ASSETS KANDIS A. WESTMORE , District Judge . TO: Defendant ROBERT BEADLES, INC., A California Corporation, and ROBERT DALE BEADLES, Defendant's Agent for Service of Process: YOU ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO APPEAR personally before this Court, or before a referee appointed by the Court, on December 14 , 2015 at 11:00 a.m. at the courthouse located at 1301 Clay Street, Oakland California 94612, to furnish information to aid i
More

[PROPOSED] AMENDED ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION OF DEBTOR ASSETS

TO: Defendant ROBERT BEADLES, INC., A California Corporation, and ROBERT DALE BEADLES, Defendant's Agent for Service of Process:

YOU ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO APPEAR personally before this Court, or before a referee appointed by the Court, on December 14, 2015 at 11:00 a.m. at the courthouse located at 1301 Clay Street, Oakland California 94612, to furnish information to aid in enforcement of the judgment entered against you on December 10, 2013 and to answer questions concerning property in your possession or control as stated in Plaintiffs' Application for Order to Appear for Debtor Examination, attached hereto as Exhibit "A."

EXHIBIT A

BARRY E. HINKLE, Bar No. 071223 TRACY L. MAINGUY, Bar No. 176928 PATRICIA A. DAVIS, Bar No. 179074 CONCEPCIÓN E. LOZANO-BATISTA, Bar No. 227227 WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD A Professional Corporation 1001 Marina Village Parkway, Suite 200 Alameda, California 94501 Telephone (510) 337-1001 Fax (510) 337-1023 E-Mail: bhinkle@unioncounsel.net tmainguy@unioncounsel.net pdavis@unioncounsel.net clozano@unioncounsel.net Attorneys for Plaintiffs UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, IN THEIR No. C-09-2557 PJH CAPACITIES AS TRUSTEES OF THE LABORERS HEALTH AND WELFARE PLAINTIFFS' APPLICATION FOR FUND, et al., ORDER TO APPEAR FOR DEBTOR EXAMINATION Plaintiffs, Date: December 2, 2015 Time: 9:00 a.m. v. Dept.: Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor Judge: Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton ROBERT BEADLES, INC., Defendant.

TO: Defendant ROBERT BEADLES, INC., a California Corporation (hereinafter "Defendant") and ROBERT DALE BEADLES, Defendant's Agent for Service of Process:

1. Plaintiff THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, in their capacities as Trustees of the LABORERS HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND, Judgment creditor, makes this application for an order requiring Defendant to aid in the enforcement of the Final Judgment entered on December 10, 2013 (attached hereto as Exhibit "A") in the above-entitled Court.

2. Plaintiffs request that Defendant produce the followign recors to be examined:

a. California Quarterly Report of Wages, For DE-6; b. Federal Tax Forms W-3 and W-2; c. 1096 and 1099 Forms; d. Workers Compensation Insurance Reports; e. Quarterly Payroll Tax Returns (Form 941); f. Check registers and supporting cash vouchers; g. General Ledger (portion relating to payroll audit); h. Payroll Registers/Journals; i. Individual Earnings Records; j. Cash Disbursements Ledger; k. Accounts Payable Ledger; and l. Vendor Invoice. WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD A Professional Corporation By: CONCEPCIÓN E. LOZANO-BATISTA Attorneys for Petitioner

EXHIBIT A2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF TRUSTEES et al., Plaintiffs, No. C 09-2557 PJH v. FINAL JUDGMENT ROBERT BEADLES, INC., Defendant.

The court having granted plaintiffs motion for default judgment in part and denied it in part,

It is Ordered and Adjudged

that plaintiffs are awarded unpaid contributions in the amount of $74,879.59; (2) interest and liquidated damages on the unpaid contributions in the amount of $94,378.62; (3) attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $20,030.23; and (4) a mandatory injunction requiring defendant to submit to an audit of its financial records by plaintiffs far the period January 1, 2007 to the present.

Further, the court retains jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter to enforce the mandatory injunction and to entertain a motion for a further money judgment, should the audit disclose additional amounts that may be owed by defendant.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer