LOCKHART v. SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO., Civ S-11-1895 KJM-KJN. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20120207832
Visitors: 4
Filed: Feb. 03, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 03, 2012
Summary: ORDER KIMBERLY MUELLER, District Judge. Local Rule 240(a) provides that "[a]ll parties receiving notice of any status conference shall appear in person or by attorney. . . ." Plaintiff's counsel, Robert D. Porter, failed to appear at the status (pretrial scheduling) conference that took place on February 2, 2012. Plaintiff's counsel did not notify the court that he would not be able to appear, seek leave of the court to not appear, or ask the court to reset the status conference. Moreover, pl
Summary: ORDER KIMBERLY MUELLER, District Judge. Local Rule 240(a) provides that "[a]ll parties receiving notice of any status conference shall appear in person or by attorney. . . ." Plaintiff's counsel, Robert D. Porter, failed to appear at the status (pretrial scheduling) conference that took place on February 2, 2012. Plaintiff's counsel did not notify the court that he would not be able to appear, seek leave of the court to not appear, or ask the court to reset the status conference. Moreover, pla..
More
ORDER
KIMBERLY MUELLER, District Judge.
Local Rule 240(a) provides that "[a]ll parties receiving notice of any status conference shall appear in person or by attorney. . . ." Plaintiff's counsel, Robert D. Porter, failed to appear at the status (pretrial scheduling) conference that took place on February 2, 2012. Plaintiff's counsel did not notify the court that he would not be able to appear, seek leave of the court to not appear, or ask the court to reset the status conference. Moreover, plaintiff's counsel is neither admitted to the Bar of this court, nor does he meet any of the exceptions to the admissions requirement provided in Local Rule 180. As such, he is not permitted to practice in this court. The court was informed by opposing counsel, who was present at the February 2 status conference, that she had been notified by plaintiff's counsel that he would not be attending and that the attorney in his firm admitted to practice in this court was not able to attend because he was in trial.
Accordingly, plaintiff's law firm, Hitzke & Associates, is hereby ORDERED to show cause within seven (7) days of the entry of this order why sanctions should not be imposed against Robert D. Porter and/or his client in accordance with Local Rule 110 for his failure to comply with Local Rules 240 and 180.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
