Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

California Department of Toxic Substances Control v. Jim Dobbas, Inc., 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20140821901 Visitors: 3
Filed: Aug. 20, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 20, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER BETWEEN PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT WEST COAST WOOD PRESERVING, LLC TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF WEST COAST WOOD PRESERVING, LLC'S ANSWER WILLAIAM. SHUBB, District Judge. WHEREAS plaintiffs California Department of Toxic Substances Control and the Toxic Substances Control Account (collectively "Plaintiffs") filed a Complaint in the above-captioned action on March 3, 2014 (ECF No. 1); WHEREAS defendant West Coast Wood Preserving, LLC ("WCWP") filed an Answer to Plain
More

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER BETWEEN PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT WEST COAST WOOD PRESERVING, LLC TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF WEST COAST WOOD PRESERVING, LLC'S ANSWER

WILLAIAM. SHUBB, District Judge.

WHEREAS plaintiffs California Department of Toxic Substances Control and the Toxic Substances Control Account (collectively "Plaintiffs") filed a Complaint in the above-captioned action on March 3, 2014 (ECF No. 1);

WHEREAS defendant West Coast Wood Preserving, LLC ("WCWP") filed an Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint on June 10, 2014 (ECF No. 22);

WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Dismiss Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.'s Counterclaim, and to Strike Portions of Answers of Defendants Jim Dobbas, Inc., David van Over, and WCWP (the "Motion") on July 7, 2014 (ECF No. 27);

WHEREAS after the filing of the Motion, counsel for WCWP and Plaintiffs conferred and agreed to resolve via stipulation the portions of the Motion that concern WCWP's Answer;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiffs and WCWP that:

1. WCWP's demand for a jury trial and prayer for attorney's fees are stricken from WCWP's Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint;

2. WCWP's Fifth (Laches), Tenth (Minimal Contribution), Eleventh (Waiver), and Twelfth (Failure to Mitigate) Affirmative Defenses are stricken from WCWP's Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint; and

3. If WCWP is found to be liable to Plaintiffs in this case, nothing in this stipulation shall affect WCWP's rights under 42 U.S.C. section 9613(f)(1) with respect to the Court's allocation of response costs in resolving contribution claims among liable persons.

This stipulation does not resolve the portions of the Motion that concern the counterclaim and answer of Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc. and the answer of Defendant David van Over. Therefore, the Motion remains set for hearing at the above date and time.

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