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.

Provident Life and Accident v. Patricia Elswick

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


February 7, 2013

PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
PATRICIA ELSWICK, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND ESTATE OF JOHN ADOLF WILES; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. Senior United States District Judge

)) ORDER CONTINUING STATUS ) (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ) CONFERENCE; FED. R. CIV. P. ) 4(M) NOTICE AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIM

The Joint Status Report filed by Plaintiff and Defendant Estate of John Adolf Wiles ("Estate") on January 29, 2013 ("JSR") reveals this case is not ready to be scheduled. The Estate indicates in the JSR that it filed a Cross-Claim against Patricia Elswick ("Elswick") on January 23, 2013; however, Elswick has not yet appeared in this action, and it is unknown if Elswick has been served with the Cross-Claim. (JSR 3:6.)

Therefore, the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference scheduled for hearing on February 11, 2013, is continued to June 24, 2013, at 9:00 a.m. A further joint status report shall be filed no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the Status Conference in which the parties shall address all pertinent subjects set forth in Local Rule 240. The parties shall also address their efforts to prosecute the Complaint and Cross-Claim as to Elswick and/or how the action should proceed without her appearance.

Further, the Estate is notified under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that failure to serve Elswick with process within the 120 day period prescribed in that Rule may result in the Cross-Claim being dismissed. To avoid dismissal, on or before May 24, 2013, the Estate shall file proof of service of the Cross-Claim or a sufficient explanation why service was not effected within Rule 4(m)'s prescribed service period.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130207

© 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.