Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Automotive Industries Pension Trust Fund, James H. Beno, Trustee v. Hustead's

September 13, 2012

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRIES PENSION TRUST FUND, JAMES H. BENO, TRUSTEE, BILL BRUNELLI, TRUSTEE, STEPHEN J. MACK, TRUSTEE, CHRIS CHRISTOPHERSEN, TRUSTEE, DON CROSATTO, TRUSTEE, MARK HOLLIBUSH, TRUSTEE, JON ROSELLE,
TRUSTEE, DOUG CORNFORD, TRUSTEE, AND JAMES V. CANTERBURY, TRUSTEE,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
HUSTEAD'S, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; SEVENTEENTH FLOOR JOE F. RUDD, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF
THE RUDD FAMILY TRUST; MARY E. RUDD, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE RUDD FAMILY TRUST; GALE V. LARKS, AN INDIVIDUAL; CAROL A. LARKS, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Edward M. Chen United States District Judge

JOINT NOTICE OF INTENT TO SETTLE; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON Date: September 18, 2012 Time: 10:30 a.m. Courtroom: 5, Honorable Edward M. Chen

Counsel for Plaintiffs, Automotive Industries Pension Trust Fund and its Board of Trustees (collectively, "Plaintiffs") and Defendants, Hustead's, Inc., a California corporation; Joe F. Rudd, 3 individually and as Trustee of the Rudd Family Trust; Mary E. Rudd, individually and as Trustee 4 of the Rudd Family Trust; Gale V. Larks, an individual; and Carol A. Larks, an individual 5 (collectively, "Defendants"), together file this session wherein the case settled. 9

1. On August 29, 2012, the plaintiffs and defendants participated in a mediation

2. The parties are under an obligation to file with the Court on September 11, 2012 a Case Management Statement and to participate in a Case Management Conference currently 11 calendared for September 18, 2012 at 10:30 a.m. 12 13 subject to a formal written agreement to be prepared. 14 15 that there should be no need for them to file a Joint Case Management Statement because they 16 each now believe that the final settlement can be fully consummated. 17

3. Counsel for each party represents that the parties have reached a settlement that is

4. As counsel and the parties work to consummate the final settlement, they believe

5. The parties respectfully request that the Court continue the Case Management

Conference for sixty (60) days so that the Court does not lose track of this action, and the parties 19 now so request that continuance from the Court in light of the tended settlement referenced above. 20

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: September 11, 2012. SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 23 24 25 26 By: ___/S/ Anne M. Bevington _______ Anne M. Bevington Attorneys for Plaintiffs

I, Anne M. Bevington, hereby attest, pursuant to N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, that the concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from each signatory hereto. 2 3

Dated: September 11, 2012. HUDDLESTON & SIPOS LAW GROUP LLP 4 By: ___/S/ Jeffrey J. Mann___________ 5 Jeffrey J. Mann 6 Attorneys for Defendant

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, AND ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.