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.

Greenberg v. Life Insurance Company of North America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


April 2, 2009

RICK M. GREENBERG, PLAINTIFF,
v.
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA AND ARROW ELECTRONICS, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: James Ware United States District Judge

JOINT APPLICATION TO VACATE SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING DATE and [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON ORDER REFERRING THE CASE FOR A SETTLEMENT WITH CONFERENCE

Current

Hearing Date: May 4, 2009

Complaint Filed: July 3, 2008

MAGISTRATE JUDGE SEEBORG

Plaintiff, Rick M. Greenberg, pro se, and Defendants, Life Insurance Company of North America ("LINA") and Arrow Electronics ("Arrow"), through their counsel of record as identified above, hereby jointly request that the Court vacate the date currently set for the hearing on cross-motions for summary judgment in this matter, of May 4, 2009. As grounds therefore, the parties state:

1. The current date of May 4, 2009 for cross-motions for summary judgment was set by the Court in its Order Vacating Hearing and Vacating Case Management Conference, issued November 25, 2008. In setting a hearing date for cross-motions for summary judgment, the Court properly understood from the parties' Joint Report of Rule 26 Conference that this ERISA benefits dispute is to be resolved via cross-motions for summary judgment, or cross-2 motions under Rule 52, and thus conducting "a bench trial on the record." E.g., Caplan v. CNA 1084, 1094-95 (9th Cir. 1999)(en banc).

Dispute Resolution Program, despite the fact that the parties had jointly requested a Settlement Fin. Corp., 544 F.Supp.2d 984 (N.D. Cal. 2008), citing Kearney v. Standard Ins. Co., 175 F.3d 4

2. The parties are informed, and thereby submit, that when the Case Management Conference date was vacated, this matter went off the calendar of the Court's Alternative Conference before a United States Magistrate Judge and had filed the required Notice of Need for an ADR Telephone Conference on October 7, 2008. This matter has now been set for an Conference before a Magistrate Judge.

of the prayers for relief contained in Plaintiff's Complaint. In January, 2009, Defendants filed their joint Answer to the Complaint, and LINA filed a Counterclaim for reimbursement of certain sums previously paid to Plaintiff as benefits under the ERISA plan.

4. On March 6, 2009, approximately fifty (50) days later, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Strike Portions of Defendant Life Insurance Company of North America's Counterclaim and April 27, 2009.

Rules, the parties' briefing of their cross-motions for summary judgment must be completed before the time that the Court hears argument on Plaintiff's pending motion, and before the parties can schedule and conduct a Settlement Conference.

6. The parties submit that proper briefing of the ultimate issues for judgment in the case will necessarily depend upon the Court's ruling on the Plaintiff's motion to amend, and therefore would have to be rewritten by reply or surreply memoranda. Thus, the current schedule virtually guarantees duplication of efforts and inconvenience for the parties and for the Court. Moreover, the parties submit that the overall interest in judicial economy would be ADR Telephone Conference on March 25, 2009, and the parties still desire a Settlement

3. In December, 2008, the Court granted the Defendants' Motion to Strike several Motion to Amend Plaintiff's Prayers for Relief. That motion is currently set for hearing on

5. Pursuant to the schedule established by the Court and the applicable Local served by permitting them to participate in a Settlement Conference before undertaking the expense and effort of preparing summary judgment motions.

7. In order to allow for hearing on the Plaintiff's pending motion, full participation in a Settlement Conference -- preferably before a United States Magistrate Judge -- and then careful preparation of cross-motions for judgment, the parties hereby jointly request that the date currently set for the hearing on the cross-motions be vacated, and that a new date convenient for the Court be set for a hearing after September 1, 2009.

ORDER ON JOINT APPLICATION set for cross-motions for summary judgment of May 4, 2009 is VACATED,. and the Court sets Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the hearing date previously The Court will set a new judgment.

for settlement conference with a magistrate judge, the Court refers the parties to Magistrate Judge Hon. JAMES WARE

Seeborg for a settlement conference. On or before April 13, 2009, the parties shall contact Judge Seeborg's Chambers to set up their conference. In light of this Order, the Court exempts the parties from participating in the Court's ADR program at this time.

20090402

© 1992-2009 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.