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.

Af Holdings LLC v. Trevor Noordman

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


January 14, 2013

AF HOLDINGS LLC, PLAINTIFF,
v.
TREVOR NOORDMAN, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Pending before the undersigned is plaintiff's motion for default judgment, presently noticed for hearing on February 7, 2013. (Dkt. No. 18.) On January 11, 2013, plaintiff's counsel filed a request to appear telephonically at the hearing on that motion. (Dkt. No. 19.) In support of the request, plaintiff's counsel indicates that he has a hearing set for that same day in another court; that his office is located in Marin County, California; and that the expense and burden of traveling to the court for the hearing would impose a great burden. (Id.)

The court denies the request for telephonic appearance for the following reasons. First, the court has some questions, especially regarding the calculation of potential damages and plaintiff's business operations, which would be best addressed through a personal appearance by plaintiff's counsel. Second, the court finds that while traveling from Mill Valley to Sacramento (which involves a travel time of about 1 hour and 45 minutes by car) may be somewhat inconvenient, it does not impose a significant burden in terms of time and expense. Given that plaintiff commenced this action in the Eastern District of California, plaintiff's counsel should be prepared to personally appear at a noticed hearing if deemed necessary by the court. Third, to the extent that plaintiff has a scheduling conflict on February 7, 2013, plaintiff's counsel may file a notice to continue the hearing for a reasonable period of time to another law and motion hearing date on which no scheduling conflict exists.

Accordingly, for the reasons outlined above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's counsel's request for a telephonic appearance at the February 7, 2013 hearing on plaintiff's motion for default judgment (dkt. no. 19) is DENIED.

2. Plaintiff's counsel, Brett Gibbs, shall personally appear at the February 7, 2013 hearing (or any subsequent date on which plaintiff's motion for default judgment is heard).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130114

© 1992-2013 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.