CHRISTIANA TRUST v. SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, 2:15-cv-01149-RFB-VCF. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20170207c76
Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 02, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 02, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR CHRISTIANA TRUST TO RESPOND TO SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT REGARDING A PURE ISSUE OF LAW: APPLICATION OF THE RETURN DOCTRINE POST-BOURNE VALLEY (Second Request for this Deadline RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Christiana Trust, A Division of Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Not in Its Individual Capacity But As Trustee of ARLP Trust 3 (h
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR CHRISTIANA TRUST TO RESPOND TO SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT REGARDING A PURE ISSUE OF LAW: APPLICATION OF THE RETURN DOCTRINE POST-BOURNE VALLEY (Second Request for this Deadline RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Christiana Trust, A Division of Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Not in Its Individual Capacity But As Trustee of ARLP Trust 3 (he..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR CHRISTIANA TRUST TO RESPOND TO SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT REGARDING A PURE ISSUE OF LAW: APPLICATION OF THE RETURN DOCTRINE POST-BOURNE VALLEY (Second Request for this Deadline
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II, District Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Christiana Trust, A Division of Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Not in Its Individual Capacity But As Trustee of ARLP Trust 3 (hereinafter "Christiana Trust"), and Defendant/Counter-Claimant, SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC (hereinafter "SFR"), by and through their undersigned counsel, to extend the deadline for Christiana Trust to file a Response to SFR's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Regarding a Pure Issue of Law: Application of the Return Doctrine Post-Bourne Valley ("Motion") [ECF No. 82] from February 2, 2017 to February 16, 2017.
Good cause exists to grant this extension as the undersigned counsel has had several cases come off of stay recently in light of the decision in Bourne Valley, which has temporarily increased counsel's workload. This is the parties' second request for extension and is not intended to cause any delay or prejudice to any party.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
