UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 19, 2011
TITLE DONALD STERLING HODGE, ET AL.
CARDINAL LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT CORP.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Present: The Honorable Christina A. Snyder
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
RITA SANCHEZ N/A N/A
Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: N/A N/A
Proceedings: (In Chambers:) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REFLECTING LOCAL RULE 83-2.3.2
On August 31, 2011, Donald Sterling Hodge and Lerry Moppin (collectively, "plaintiffs") filed their class action complaint against defendant Cardinal Logistics Management Corporation ("Cardinal Logistics") in Los Angeles Superior Court. On October 7, 2011, defendant removed to this Court.
On October 12, 2011, attorneys Robert Browning and Angela Cash each filed an application to appear pro hac vice in this matter on behalf of Cardinal Logistics. On October 13, 2011, this Court granted each attorney's application.
On October 17, 2011, plaintiffs filed an objection to Mr. Browning's and Ms. Cash's pro hac vice applications. Plaintiffs' objections are made pursuant to Local Rule 83-2.3.2, which disqualifies pro hac vice applicants who are regularly employed in California or regularly engage in business in California. Obj. at 2--3; Local Rule 83-2.3.2(b)--(c). Plaintiffs argue that Mr. Brown is regularly employed in California, as evidenced by seven class action suits he has litigated in California in the last three years.
at 4. Plaintiffs argue that Ms. Cash is also regularly employed in California, as evidenced by three class action suits she has litigated in the past three years. Id. at 5. Further, plaintiffs argue that both Mr. Browning and Ms. Cash are partners in the Scopelitis Firm, which has ongoing business activities in California. Id. at 6.
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Mr. Browning and Ms. Cash to SHOW CAUSE thirty (30) days of the date of this order why this Court should not reconsider each of their pro hac vice applications in light of plaintiffs' objections and Local Rule 83-
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.