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.

In re Curen

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


May 24, 2010

IN RE JOHN VAN CUREN, AS TRUSTEE OF THE CHAPTER 11
ESTATE OF MICHAEL HAT, A/K/A MICHAEL HAT FARMING COMPANY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
FEDERAL CROP INSURANCE CORPORATION; AND RISK MANAGEMENT AGENCY, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Vaughn R. Walker United States District Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM AND FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO DISMISS FOR IMPROPER VENUE

THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

1. On July 30, 2009, JOHN VAN CUREN, the plaintiff herein (the "Plaintiff") filed the Complaint For Breach Of Contract And For Damages Under 7 C.F.R. § 400.96 (the "Complaint").

2. On October 15, 2009, the FEDERAL CROP INSURANCE CORPORATION and the RISK MANAGEMENT AGENCY, the defendants herein (the "Defendants," or collectively with the Plaintiff, the "Parties"), responded to the Complaint by filing the Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim And For Lack Of Jurisdiction, And In The Alternative To Dismiss For Improper Venue (the "Motion"), initially scheduled for hearing on January 7, 2010, and later continued by stipulation between the Parties to February 25, 2010.

3. In the interim, and upon reviewing the Motion, the Plaintiff determined that it would be necessary to amend the Complaint. Accordingly, on February 2, 2010, the Parties filed the Stipulation To (1) Allow Filing Of Amended Complaint; And (2) Establishing Timetable For Responsive Pleadings Relating Thereto; Order Thereon (the "Stipulation," Docket No. 17), whereby the Parties agreed to a new timetable for pleading the controversy, and proposed April 22, 2010 as the new hearing date.

4. Thereafter, based on the Court's requested recalendaring, the Parties again agreed to continue the hearing date from April 22, 2010 until June 10, 2010 (the "Scheduled Hearing").

5. Based on an additional scheduling conflict for plaintiff's counsel, and at plaintiff's counsel's request, the Parties have agreed through their respective counsel, subject to Court approval, to postpone the Scheduled Hearing and reset the Motion for hearing on Thursday, July 1, 2010 at 10:00 a.m., the next available hearing date that accommodates both parties. The Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition to the Motion shall be filed and served no later than June 9, 2010, and any reply memorandum shall be filed and served by the Defendants no later than June 18, 2010.

6. By agreeing to this stipulation, the Defendant does not agree that a hearing is necessary or appropriate; in fact, the matter may be appropriate for decision on the papers.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: May 17, 2010

MEYERS LAW GROUP, P.C. Merle C. Meyers Attorneys for Plaintiff John Van Curen

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO United States Attorney Jonathan U. Lee Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendants Federal Crop Insurance Corporation and Risk Management Agency

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100524

© 1992-2010 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.