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.

Lucas v. Hertz Corporation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

May 31, 2013

KATHLEEN M. LUCAS, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
HERTZ CORPORATION, Defendants.

ORDER (1) TO SHOW CAUSE AND (2) SETTING A FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE [Re: ECF No. 99, 100]

LAUREL BEELER, Magistrate Judge.

Kathleen Lucas and Dan Martin (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed the instant action against car rental company Hertz Corporation ("Hertz"). Notice of Removal, ECF No. 1 at 5-12 ("Complaint").[1] Hertz filed counterclaims for equitable indemnity, apportionment, and declaratory relief against Mr. Martin. Amended Answer and Counterclaims, ECF No. 42. Ms. Lucas and Mr. Martin (as a plaintiff) are represented by attorney Cynthia McGuinn; Mr. Martin (as a counterdefendant) is represented by attorney Steven Toschi; and Hertz is represented by attorneys John Ranucci and Liza Siu Mendoza.

On June 21, 2012, the court granted Hertz's motion to compel Mr. Martin to arbitrate his claims pursuant to an arbitration agreement incorporated by reference into the car rental agreement that Mr. Martin signed. 6/21/2012 Order, ECF No. 53. This left Ms. Lucas's claims against Hertz and Hertz's counterclaims against Mr. Martin pending before this court. Ms. Lucas apparently agreed to settle her claims against Hertz, but, to date, the parties have yet to file a stipulation of dismissal of her claims. See 1/23/2013 Minute Order, ECF No. 93; 2/21/2013 CMC Statement, ECF No. 98 at 4. In addition, Hertz has stated that it will dismiss its counterclaims against Mr. Martin, but, to date, the parties have yet to file a stipulation of dismissal of these claims, either. See 2/21/2013 CMC Statement, ECF No. 98 at 6 n.1.

The court noted these outstanding dismissals in its order staying this case while Mr. Martin's claim is in arbitration. 2/25/2013 Order, ECF No. 99 at 2. To keep track of the case, the court also ordered the parties (i.e., all of them) to file a joint status update no later than May 30, 2013. Id. at 3.

On May 30, 2013, Mr. Martin (as a counterdefendant) and Hertz filed a status update. 5/30/2013 Status Update, ECF No. 100. Ms. Lucas and Mr. Martin (as a plaintiff) did not join in the statement. With respect to Ms. Lucas's claims against Hertz (which, again, she apparently agreed to settle), Hertz sent Ms. Lucas a "Release of Claims & Settlement Agreement" on March 28, 2013, but it still is awaiting the return of the executed agreement. Id. at 2. With respect to the dismissal of the claims that are not in arbitration, Hertz sent Ms. Lucas and Mr. Martin a proposed stipulation and order of dismissal on March 28, 2013, but it "only heard back from [Mr. Toschi, counsel for Mr. Martin (as a counterdefendant)], who accepted the proposed language" of it. Id. Mr. Martin (as a counterdefendant) and Hertz state that when Ms. Lucas returns the executed settlement agreement and the stipulation and order of dismissal, the case can be dismissed. Id.

Due to Ms. Lucas's and Mr. Martin's (as a plaintiff) failure to participate in the status update, the court ORDERS their counsel, Ms. McGuinn, to show cause why she should not be sanctioned for her failure to comply with the court's 2/25/2013 order. She may do so by filing a written response no later than June 7, 2013.

In addition, the court SETS a Further Case Management Conference for August 1, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom C, 15th Floor, United States District Court, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, 94102. The parties shall file a joint case management conference statement no later than July 25, 2013.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.