Hall v. Amtrak National Railroad Passenger Corporation, C 19-02312 WHA. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190712a29
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jul. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 11, 2019
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WILLIAM ALSUP , District Judge . Pro se plaintiff Randy Lee Hall initiated this action in the Superior Court for Contra Costa County alleging gross negligence when his daughter was killed by an Amtrak train. This morning, a hearing was held on defendants' motion to dismiss as well as plaintiff's motions to remand, transfer, or stay. The case was called. Pro se plaintiff appeared, but defendants' counsel were not there. The case was put to the end of the calendar to gi
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WILLIAM ALSUP , District Judge . Pro se plaintiff Randy Lee Hall initiated this action in the Superior Court for Contra Costa County alleging gross negligence when his daughter was killed by an Amtrak train. This morning, a hearing was held on defendants' motion to dismiss as well as plaintiff's motions to remand, transfer, or stay. The case was called. Pro se plaintiff appeared, but defendants' counsel were not there. The case was put to the end of the calendar to giv..
More
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
WILLIAM ALSUP, District Judge.
Pro se plaintiff Randy Lee Hall initiated this action in the Superior Court for Contra Costa County alleging gross negligence when his daughter was killed by an Amtrak train. This morning, a hearing was held on defendants' motion to dismiss as well as plaintiff's motions to remand, transfer, or stay. The case was called. Pro se plaintiff appeared, but defendants' counsel were not there. The case was put to the end of the calendar to give counsel the opportunity to appear. At the end of the calendar, the case was re-called but counsel were still not there. Put simply, pro se plaintiff came all the way from Contra Costa County — defendants' counsel never bothered to show up.
Accordingly, by JULY 18, 2019, counsel for defendants, Vincent Castillo and Alexei Nathan Offhill-Klein, must SHOW CAUSE why they should not be referred to the Court's Standing Committee on Professional Conduct for their inexcusable absence. By that same date, counsel should also explain under oath why the Court should not order them to personally pay plaintiff for the hours he spent commuting to and being present at today's hearing.
A hearing on this order to SHOW CAUSE is hereby set for AUGUST 1 AT 8:00 A.M. Both parties must appear. Plaintiff's reply to defendants' brief, if any, is due by JULY 25.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
