UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 11, 2013
AMEGY BANK, N.A.,
MICHAEL WALKER; JEFF BAKER,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER VACATING APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR JEFF BAKER ORDER REMOVING THE MARCH 13, 2013, DEBTOR EXAMINATION FROM THE COURT'S CALENDAR (Doc. 9)
On February 5, 2013, Plaintiff Amegy Bank, N.A., filed a motion and application for an order for the appearance and examination of judgment debtor, Jeff Baker. (Doc. 9.) As Plaintiff's request met the statutory requirements, the Court issued an order on February 13, 2013, for the appearance and examination of Jeff Baker on March 13, 2013. (Doc. 10.) In the February 13, 2013, order, Plaintiff was specifically directed to file a certificate of service establishing that, within 10 days of the date set for appearance and examination, judgment debtor Jeff Baker was personally served with the Court's order February 13, 2013, order. (Doc. 10, p. 3, ¶ 2.) As of March 6, 2013, no certificate of service was filed by Plaintiff. On March 6, 2013, the Court issued a minute order reiterating that Plaintiff was to file a certificate of service no later than March 8, 2013, establishing that Jeff Baker was personally served with the Court's February 13, 2013, order. (Doc. 12.) The minute order also noted that failure to file a certificate of personal service would result in vacating the order for personal appearance and examination. Nonetheless, Plaintiff failed to file a certificate of service.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The order for the personal appearance and examination of Jeff Baker is VACATED and the debtor examination is REMOVED from the Court's calendar;
2. Jeff Baker shall not be required to appear for examination on February 13, 2013; and
3. If Plaintiff seeks a further court order for appearance and examination of a judgment debtor, such a request must be refiled and a new examination date must be set with the understanding that further non-compliance, or a failure to explain an inability to comply with the Court's orders, may subject Plaintiff's counsel to monetary sanctions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.