Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Schultz v. Ichimoto

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


August 15, 2008

RODNEY SCHULTZ AND PATRICIA SCHULTZ, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
SAKAYE ICHIMOTO, ET AL, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge

STIPULATION & ORDER

Plaintiffs and defendants George A. Wolfe and Frances E. Wolfe, through their counsel, stipulate, pursuant to Local Rule 6-144(a), that the time for these defendants to respond to the Complaint may be extended to September 15, 2008, an extension of 31days (September 14, 2008 being a Sunday). There were two prior extensions.

There is good cause for this extension in that defendants are engaged in the process of tendering this claim to their insurance company. The adjustor for the insurance company has notified counsel for the Wolfe defendants that the insurance company has referred the claim to outside counsel for a coverage determination. The Wolfe defendants have accordingly not yet received a decision on the tender of this claim to their insurance carrier, but the insurance carrier has indicated that additional time is needed to consider the coverage issue.

Dated: August 14, 2008

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20080815

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.