Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

UNITED CAPTIAL FINANCIAL ADVISORS v. CAPITAL INSIGHT PARTNERS, 2:12-cv-00300-LRH-PAL. (2012)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20120511965 Visitors: 14
Filed: May 09, 2012
Latest Update: May 09, 2012
Summary: ORDER (Substitution of Counsel — Dkt. ##39, 40, 41) (Stip to Extend — Dkt. #42) PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on three Motions to Substitute Attorneys (Dkt. ##39, 40, 41). The first Motion (Dkt. #39), filed May 3, 2012, seeks to substitute Michael A. Olsen in the place and stead of Michael V. Infuso as counsel for Defendant Suzanne Youles. The second Motion (Dkt. #40), filed May 4, 2012, seeks to substitute Albert G. Marquis and David T. Duncan in the plac
More

ORDER

(Substitution of Counsel — Dkt. ##39, 40, 41)

(Stip to Extend — Dkt. #42)

PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.

This matter is before the court on three Motions to Substitute Attorneys (Dkt. ##39, 40, 41). The first Motion (Dkt. #39), filed May 3, 2012, seeks to substitute Michael A. Olsen in the place and stead of Michael V. Infuso as counsel for Defendant Suzanne Youles. The second Motion (Dkt. #40), filed May 4, 2012, seeks to substitute Albert G. Marquis and David T. Duncan in the place and stead of Michael V. Infuso as counsel for Defendant Capital Insight Partners. The third Motion (Dkt. #41) seeks to substitute Randal D. Shimon and Curtiss S. Chamberlain in the place and stead of Michael V. Infuso as counsel for Defendant Vicki Gilman.

LR IA 10-6(c) requires that any stipulation to substitute attorneys shall be by leave of court and shall bear the signature of the attorneys and the client represented. It provides that the signature of an attorney to substitute into a case "constitutes an express acceptance of all dates then set for pretrial proceedings, for trial or hearing, by the discovery plan, or in any court order." LR IA 10-6(d) also provides that the substitution of an attorney "shall not alone be reason for delay of pretrial proceedings, discovery, the trial, or any hearing in this case." Plaintiff filed its Complaint (Dkt. #1) on February 24, 2012. Defendants' have filed a Stipulation (Dkt. #42), seeking to extend their answer deadline until May 21, 2012, based on these substitutions.

Having reviewed and considered the matter,

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Defendant Youles' Motion to Substitute (Dkt. #39) Michael A. Olsen in the place and stead of Michael V. Infuso is GRANTED. 2. Defendant Capital Insight Partners' Motion to Substitute (Dkt. #40) Albert G. Marquis and David T. Duncan in the place and stead of Michael V. Infuso is GRANTED. 3. Defendant Vicki Gilman's Motion to Substitute (Dkt. #41) Randal D. Shimon and Curtiss S. Chamberlain in the place and stead of Michael V. Infuso is GRANTED. 4. The parties' Stipulation to Extend Time (Dkt. #42) is GRANTED. Defendants shall file a responsive pleading no later than May 21, 2012.
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