Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Rankings
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Glass Ceiling Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Kessler Collins
-
Order | Filed: February 07, 2023 | Entered: February 07, 2023 Russ et al v. Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. et al
Real Property: Other | South Carolina
Order on Motion for Protective Order Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply
TEXT ORDER denying 326 Defendant Marriott Resorts Hospitality Corporation's ("MRHC") Motion for Protective Order Regarding Corporate Representative Deposition. MRHC contends this Court should issue a protective order precluding the 30(b)(6) Deposition of MRHC because, among other reasons, Plaintiff's notice was untimely and insufficient to allow for the 30(b)(6) deposition before the close of class discovery. However, the Court declines to wade into the foray of whether a 30(b)(6) deposition notice served one week before Thanksgiving could be completed within the time allowed by the Third Amended Scheduling Order. Instead, since the parties were attempting in good faith to schedule the deposition before this impasse was reached, the Court will allow the 30(b)(6) deposition to occur after the discovery deadline, notwithstanding MRHC's remaining objections. Accordingly, Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the date of this order in which to depose such corporate representative(s). In light of the foregoing, the Court grants 335 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to the Motion for Class Certification, in part. Defendants' responses to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification shall be due twenty-one (21) days after the corporate representative deposition of MRHC. Thereafter, Plaintiff shall have thirty days to file a reply, if any. Signed by Honorable Joseph Dawson, III on 2/7/2023.(prou, )
-
Order | Filed: February 06, 2023 | Entered: February 06, 2023 Kinnie Ma Individual Retirement Account v. Ascendant Capital, LLC et al
Stockholders Suits | Texas Western
Protective Order ~Util - Terminate Motions
CONFIDENTIALITY AND PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Lee Yeakel. (cc3)
-
Order | Filed: February 06, 2023 | Entered: February 06, 2023 Kinnie Ma Individual Retirement Account v. Ascendant Capital, LLC et al
Stockholders Suits | Texas Western
Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice
ORDER GRANTING 1108 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice as to ROBERT STAROSELSKY. Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. Registration is managed by the PACER Service Center Signed by Judge Lee Yeakel. (cc3)
Stay ahead of the curve
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
- Archive of over 450,000 articles
- Database of over 2.1 million cases
- 62,000+ organization-specific pages.
- Daily and real-time news and case alerts on organizations, industries, and customized search queries.
- Significant legal events involving law firms, companies, industries, and government agencies.
- Learn more
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login