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.

Amit Mahajan v. Sangeeta Kumar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 17, 2012

AMIT MAHAJAN,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
SANGEETA KUMAR, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING (Docs. 144, 145, 146, and 147)

On February 22, 2012, the District Court entered default against Defendants and directed Plaintiff to move for judgment on default. Plaintiff filed his motion for judgment on March 6, 2012. This Court hereby directs supplemental briefing as follows:

1. Plaintiff has filed a copy of the Default Judgment Against Sangeeta Samy [fka Sangeeta Kumar] to Complaint by Amit Mahajan to Determine Dischargeability of Debt, filed November 3, 2010, by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California in Mahajan v. Samy, Case No. 10-26658, Adversary No. 10-02393 (Doc. 137-1). This document grants Plaintiff a non-dischargeable judgment for principal of $130,000.00 plus costs of $250.00, for a total amount of $130,250.00. Plaintiff is directed to provide a brief memorandum of points and authorities explaining the impact of the Bankruptcy Court's prior judgment, including an explanation of why the request pending before this Court is not duplicative.

2. Plaintiff's motion for judgment did not include a memorandum of points and authorities setting forth the legal authority and factual basis for the requested punitive damages. Plaintiff is directed to submit a brief discussion of this issue this issue, including a explanation of the effect of the November 3, 2010 bankruptcy judgment on the request.

3. Plaintiff is directed to supplement the briefing directed by paragraphs one and two with a clear and detailed calculation of the damages requested in this case.

Plaintiff is directed to submit his supplemental brief on or before May 4, 2012. The matter shall then be deemed submitted for decision pursuant to Local Rule 230(h) (Fed. R. Civ. P. 78).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120417

© 1992-2012 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.