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.

Brady v. Conseco

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


September 22, 2009

CEDRIC BRADY, DR. CHARLES HOVDEN, MARION HOVDEN, DR. EUGENE KREPS, DR. JOHN MCNAMARA, DR. HISAJI SAKAI, AND JEAN SAKAI, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CONSECO, INC. AND CONSECO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Susan Illston

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING THE DATE FOR PLAINTIFFS TO AMEND THEIR COMPLAINT

WHEREAS, on December 24, 2008, plaintiffs Cedric Brady, Dr. Charles Hovden, Marion Hovden, Dr. Eugene Kreps, Dr. John McNamara, Dr. Hisaji Sakai, and Jean Sakai (the "Plaintiffs") filed a Complaint against defendants Conseco, Inc. and Conseco Life Insurance Company ("Conseco Life" or "Defendant," referred to collectively with the Plaintiffs as the "Parties"), in the San Francisco Division of the United States District for the Northern District of California (the "Complaint").

WHEREAS, on April 23, 2009, the Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint (Docket No. 51);

WHEREAS, on May 29, 2009, Conseco, Inc. and Conseco Life Insurance Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (Docket No. 58);

WHEREAS, on July 29, 2009, the Court entered an Order Granting In Part And Denying In Part Conseco, Inc.'s and Conseco Life Insurance Company's Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 64), which states, in part, "If plaintiffs wish to file an amended complaint to allege facts in support of their claims for breach of fiduciary duty and in support of their contention that this Court has personal jurisdiction over Conseco, Inc., they shall do so by October 1, 2009"; the Plaintiffs have noticed depositions of Conseco, Inc. and Conseco Life Insurance Company; discovery on issues that will impact the content of the Plaintiffs' amended Complaint; and deadline for the Plaintiffs to amend their Complaint shall be extended to November 9, 2009.

WHEREAS, the Parties are engaged in discovery regarding these matters, and others; and

WHEREAS, the Parties have conferred and agree that additional time is needed to conduct

WHEREAS, this extension will not impact other events and/or deadlines in this action;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by the undersigned Parties that the (Conseco, Inc. and Conseco Life reserve all rights with respect to any amended Complaint, including the right to move to dismiss any new claims pursuant to the Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.)

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45

I, DavidS. Clancy, amtheECFUser whoseIDand passwordarebeingusedtofile this Stipulation And Proposed Order Establishing Briefing Schedule And Case Management Conference. In compliance with General Order 45.X.B, I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this 18 day of September, 2009, at Boston, Massachusetts.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED,

20090922

© 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.