Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Love v. Trapani, 18-cv-06289-SI. (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20190605d88 Visitors: 19
Filed: Jun. 03, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 03, 2019
Summary: ORDER SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE FOR FRIDAY JUNE 7, 2019 AT 3:00 PM AND ORDERING COUNSEL TO ATTEND IN PERSON SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . On February 11, 2019, this Court entered a consent decree drafted and signed by the parties in this case. Dkt. No. 11. The consent decree was agreed to by plaintiff Samuel Love and defendants Joseph Trapani, Teresa Trapani, and Mobile-Tech Automotive, Inc., and it settles the portion of this case relating to injunctive relief. The consent decree was si
More

ORDER SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE FOR FRIDAY JUNE 7, 2019 AT 3:00 PM AND ORDERING COUNSEL TO ATTEND IN PERSON

On February 11, 2019, this Court entered a consent decree drafted and signed by the parties in this case. Dkt. No. 11. The consent decree was agreed to by plaintiff Samuel Love and defendants Joseph Trapani, Teresa Trapani, and Mobile-Tech Automotive, Inc., and it settles the portion of this case relating to injunctive relief. The consent decree was signed by Farrell Goodman, Esq., on behalf of plaintiff.

On May 24, 2019, the Court held a case management conference in this case. Prior to the conference, the parties filed separate case management conference statements (in violation of this Court's standing order). Plaintiff's statement was filed by Amanda Lockhart Seabock, Esq. Plaintiff's statement made no mention of the consent decree and proposed a discovery and litigation schedule as if no settlement had occurred. Defendants' statement represented, consistent with the existence of the consent decree, that all that remained in this case was a determination of damages. Ms. Seabock did not attend the case management conference, and instead Mr. Goodman represented plaintiff.1 At the conference, the Court ordered plaintiff to make a settlement demand regarding damages no later than May 31, 2019, and referred this case to a magistrate judge for settlement of damages. Dkt. No. 16.

On May 29, 2019, plaintiff filed three separate motions for entry of default as to each of the defendants, based on defendants' failure to file an answer. The motions were filed by Ms. Seabock. Because defendants have appeared in this case — and because the parties have settled injunctive relief and are actively negotiating damages — entry of default is wholly inappropriate, and the Court has instructed the Clerk not to enter default against defendants.

The Court schedules a status conference in this case for Friday June 7, 2019 at 3:00 p.m. Counsel, including Ms. Seabock and Mr. Goodman, are ordered to attend in person.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Mr. Goodman has not entered an appearance in this case, and it is unclear what his affiliation is to plaintiff's counsel of record.
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