UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
March 20, 2012
ASM CAPITAL, LP, ET AL.
EDWARD H. OKUN, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Phyllis Hamilton United States District Judge
Robert L. Brace, Esq., SBN 122240 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org 2 HOLLISTER & BRACE P.O. Box 630 3 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 Telephone: (805) 963-6711 4 Facsimile: (805) 965-0329 5 Attorneys for the ASM Plaintiffs 6
Assigned to the Hon. Phyllis Hamilton
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER STAYING CASE
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2012, the Court held a hearing on the Motion to Dismiss the 17 plaintiff's complaint (hereinafter, the "ASM Complaint") filed by Silicon Valley Law Group 18 ("SVLG"); 19
WHEREAS, the ASM Complaint was filed by twenty-four 1031 Exchangers doing 20 business with 1031 Advance; 21
WHEREAS, another action is pending before Judge Ware entitled Hunter, et al. v. Citibank, N.A., et al, Case No. C 09-2079-JW (hereinafter, "Hunter II"). In Hunter II, another 23 1031 Advance Exchanger is suing SVLG for the same facts and same causes of action raised in 24 the ASM Complaint; 25
WHEREAS, the Bankruptcy Trustee of 1031 Advance filed an action against SVLG 26 entitled Gerard A. McHale, P.A., as Liquidation Trustee for the 1031 Debtors Liquidation Trust 27 v. Silicon Valley Law Group, Case No. C 10-4864 JW (the "McHale Case"). This case was 28 deemed as related to Hunter II, and is also pending before Judge Ware;
WHEREAS, the Hunter II and McHale cases are set for trial in October 2012;
WHEREAS, at the hearing on SVLG's Motion to Dismiss, the Court stayed the above- 3 captioned action pending resolution of Hunter II and McHale cases, and this stipulation is 4 entered into by the parties to effectuate the Court's desire to stay the action; 5
THEREFORE, the Parties agree to stay this action until the conclusion of Hunter II, in 6 order to save resources and the Court's time. 7 8
IT IS SO STIPULATED:
20 action is stayed until the conclusion of the Hunter II and McHale cases. The Parties will notify 21 the Court that the stay should be lifted or the case dismissed, after the conclusion of the Hunter II 22 and McHale cases. 23 24
NOW, THEREFORE, and for good cause appearing, the Court ORDERS THAT this PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.