Filed: Jan. 25, 2012
Latest Update: Jan. 25, 2012
Summary: ORDER LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, Senior District Judge. Plaintiffs in this case filed a motion for summary judgment on December 19, 2011, which was originally set for hearing on January 17, 2012. Defendants Elam, Muller, and Cremarosa are appearing in this action in propia persona. Defendant Benjamin Balme is represented by counsel. No defendants filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the summary judgment motion by the deadline for making such a filing, and this court issued an orde
Summary: ORDER LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, Senior District Judge. Plaintiffs in this case filed a motion for summary judgment on December 19, 2011, which was originally set for hearing on January 17, 2012. Defendants Elam, Muller, and Cremarosa are appearing in this action in propia persona. Defendant Benjamin Balme is represented by counsel. No defendants filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the summary judgment motion by the deadline for making such a filing, and this court issued an order..
More
ORDER
LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiffs in this case filed a motion for summary judgment on December 19, 2011, which was originally set for hearing on January 17, 2012. Defendants Elam, Muller, and Cremarosa are appearing in this action in propia persona. Defendant Benjamin Balme is represented by counsel. No defendants filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the summary judgment motion by the deadline for making such a filing, and this court issued an order for each defendant to show cause for failing to comply with Local Rule 230. With respect to defendant Balme, the order to show cause was directed to counsel. The court continued the hearing to January 30, 2012, and ordered each defendant to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition no later than January 16, 2012.
On January 16, 2012 Defendant Balme filed an opposition to the summary judgment motion, and counsel for Mr. Balme filed a response to the order to show cause. In the response, Mr. Balme's counsel indicated that Mr. Balme did not file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the summary judgment motion because Mr. Balme was attempting to reach a settlement with Midas up until the day that an opposition or statement of non-opposition was due, and that Mr. Balme elected to file for personal bankruptcy rather than to respond to the motion for summary judgment. Mr. Balme asserts that he did file for personal bankruptcy on January 9, 2012.
The three pro se defendants have also filed responses to the order to show cause. Each of them indicate that they plan to file for personal bankruptcy.
Accordingly the court ORDERS as follows:
[1] The court finds that no sanction is appropriate at this time.
[2] The case is STAYED for twenty-one (21) days to allow the defendants to notify the court whether they have filed for bankruptcy. Each defendant who files for bankruptcy SHALL notify the court in writing.
[4] The hearing on plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is CONTINUED to March 12, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. Any defendant who has not filed for bankruptcy SHALL file an opposition or statement of non-opposition no later than February 27, 2012.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
