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.

Dennly Becker v. Wells Fargo Bank

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 22, 2012

DENNLY BECKER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., INC.,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Pending before the court is plaintiff's motion for an order to show cause why defendant should not be held in contempt for violation of a court order. Plaintiff contends defendant should be held in contempt because defendant failed to file an answer after being granted an extension of time by the court. See dkt. no. 19. While plaintiff is correct that defendant's responsive pleading was due by April 27, 2012 under the court's order, holding defendant in contempt appears unwarranted in light of the other avenues available to plaintiff, such as seeking entry of default.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The hearing date of July 18, 2012 on plaintiff's motion for order to show cause is vacated; and

2. Plaintiff's motion (dkt. no. 32) is denied.

20120522

© 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.