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.

Edna Hess v. Madera Honda Suzuki; Harry D. Wilson

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


August 24, 2012

EDNA HESS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MADERA HONDA SUZUKI; HARRY D. WILSON, INC.; ROBERT D. WILSON; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE,
DEFENDANTS.

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO PROVIDE FURTHER BRIEFING

The Court refers the parties to previous orders for a complete chronology of the proceedings. Plaintiff Edna Hess ("Plaintiff") has filed a complaint against defendants Madera Honda Suzuki, Harry D. Wilson, Inc., Robert D. Wilson (collectively "Defendants") and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the California Labor Code. On July 13, 2012, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication in the alternative pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. The Court took the matter under submission on August 14, 2012. Having reviewed the pleadings of record and all competent and admissible evidence submitted, the Court now finds the matter warrants additional briefing on the corporate status of Harry D. Wilson, Inc., dba Madera Honda Suzuki, the entity in which Plaintiff -- along with her husband, Terry Hess, defendant Robert Wilson and his wife Lisa Wilson -- is alleged to have been a shareholder. In particular, the Court directs the parties to provide information about the type of corporation Harry D. Wilson, Inc., is currently registered as (e.g., general stock, close, professional, S corp, C corp, etc.) as well as copies of documents for corporate formation that were required to have been filed with the California Secretary of State and/or the Securities and Exchange Commission. The parties shall have through 4:00 p.m. Friday, September 7, 2012 to file such information with the Court. If there is no dispute regarding these issues, the parties may file a joint brief. Otherwise, the parties may file separate briefs. If separate briefs are filed, each party shall have through 4:00 p.m. Friday, September 14, 2012 to file a response to the opposing party's brief. IT IS SO ORDERED.

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20120824

© 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.