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.

Marshall Loskot v. Chad Hylton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 17, 2011

MARSHALL LOSKOT,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
CHAD HYLTON, ADAM SIMAS, DBA HAMPTON COLLECTIVE, M & M PARTNERSHIP, AND DOES ONE THROUGH FIFTY, INCLUSIVE,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge

Jason K. Singleton, State Bar #166170 jason@singletonlawgroup.com SINGLETON LAW GROUP 611 "L" Street, Suite A Eureka, CA 95501 (707) 441-1177 FAX 441-1533 Attorneys for Plaintiff, MARSHALL LOSKOT

STIPULATION TO ALLOW FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT and (proposed) ORDER

Plaintiff, MARSHALL LOSKOT, filed his complaint on March 1, 2011, and immediately filed an AMENDED COMPLAINT to correct the spelling of named Defendant CHAD HILTON to CHAD HYLTON. The Amended complaint was served on Defendants and Defendant M & M PARTNERSHIP filed its answer on March 24, 2011.

No responsive pleading was received from Defendants CHAD HYLTON or ADAM SIMAS and Plaintiff's counsel wrote Defendants a letter advising Plaintiff would take their default if no responsive pleading was filed. Plaintiff's counsel was contacted by Defendants representative advising the subject business was owned and operated by THE HAMPTON COLLECTIVE, a California corporation, and not by the named individuals.

Plaintiff desires to file a Second Amended Complaint removing the individuals CHAD HYLTON and ADAM SIMAS and inserting THE HAMPTON COLLECTIVE, a California corporation, in their place and stead. No other changes will be made to the complaint. A copy of the proposed Second Amended Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Defendant M & M PARTNERSHIP stipulates that Plaintiff may file the Second Amended Complaint and Plaintiff stipulates that M & M PARTNERSHIP shall not be required to file an Answer to the Second Amended Complaint and that its Answer filed March 24, 2011, is accepted as responsive to the Second Amended Complaint.

ORDER

Based on the foregoing stipulation and good cause appearing,

1. Plaintiff may file a Second Amended Complaint and the Clerk is directed to issue a Summons for Defendant THE HAMPTON COLLECTIVE, a California corporation.

2. Defendant M & M PARTNERSHIP shall not be required to file an Answer to the Second Amended Complaint, its Answer filed March 24, 2011, is accepted as responsive to the Second Amended Complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20110517

© 1992-2011 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.