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.

Escoto v. Foremost Superior Marble

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 6, 2009

GERARDO ESCOTO, TEODORO RUVALCABA, AND TOMAS VEGA, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
FOREMOST SUPERIOR MARBLE, INC., PAUL HOWARD, ANTHONY JONES AND DOES 1-10, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge

ORDER

Presently before the Court is Defendants' Motion to Disqualify Counsel for Plaintiffs pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(4).*fn1 Defendants' Motion is made on grounds that Plaintiffs' attorneys are unable to competently represent the interests of Plaintiffs and the class they purport to represent in this lawsuit for alleged wage and hour violations.

Rule 23, by its terms, applies only to class actions. While Plaintiffs' complaint is indeed denominated as a class action, Plaintiffs have made no effort to certify this matter as a class and, in opposition to Defendants' Motion, specifically represent that they have no intent to move for such certification. Pls.' Opp., 2:8-12.

Absent class certification and given Plaintiffs' representation that they intend to proceed forward with this lawsuit only on their individual claims, Defendants' Motion to Disqualify is moot and is accordingly DENIED.*fn2

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.