Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Murtaugh Attorneys At Law x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Copyright | California Eastern
Opposition to Motion
OPPOSITION by Adavco, Inc. to 120 Motion for Summary Judgment,, 117 Motion for Summary Judgment,,,,,. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Declaration of B. Tamsut in Support of Reply to Opposition of Partial Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment, # 2 Exhibit 1 in support of B. Tamsut Declaration, # 3 Exhibit 2 in support of B. Tamsut Declaration, # 4 Objections to Evidence ISO Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, # 5 Statement of Disputed Facts ISO Opposition to Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, # 6 Response to Separate Statement of Undisputed Facts ISO Partial Motion for Summary Judgment, # 7 Response to Defendants' Objections to Evidence)(Tamsut, Brian)
Minute Order ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings
MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Guy Castillo on 8/19/2026: The Court is in receipt of Defendant's Motion to Strike, which is brought pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30. (See Doc. 118 ). The parties are advised that the motion is governed by E.D. Cal. Local Rule 251 (motions dealing with discovery matters, including "a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 through 37"). See E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(a). Accordingly, the hearing currently scheduled for September 2, 2026 is hereby CONTINUED to September 16, 2026 and the "Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement" by the parties SHALL be filed no later than September 2, 2026M. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(a)-(c). No separate briefing in addition to the Joint Statement shall be filed, and the Court will disregard that which has been filed previously. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(c)(3) ("All arguments and briefing that would otherwise be included in a memorandum of points and authorities supporting or opposing the motion shall be included in this joint statement, and no separate briefing shall be filed."). Finally, Local Rule 251 requires that the parties meaningfully meet and confer with each other in attempt to resolve their differences. This means, in addition to any written correspondence the parties shall engage in (letters and/or email), the parties MUST speak with each other about their discovery disputes. This requirement may be accomplished in person, over the telephone, or through videoconferencing. The details of the conference(s) must be set forth with particularity in the "Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement." Failure to comply with these requirements will result in the denial of the motion. (Deputy Clerk YV)
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.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.