Lawrence Chip Crandall and Alicia Berry as co-trustees of the Revocable Intervivos Trust of Marjorie M. Crandall dated February 28, 1991 as restated in full on April 7, 2011 v. Semillon, Inc. et al
| Lawrence Chip Crandall and Alicia Berry as co-trustees of the Revocable Intervivos Trust of Marjorie M. Crandall dated February 28, 1991 as restated in full on April 7, 2011 |
| Semillon, Inc., Fairlane Cleaners, Inc., Thomas E. Mullins, Alexander G. Shaw, Cindy L. Casselman and Does 1 through 100 |
| Semillon, Inc. |
| Lawrence Chip Crandall and Alicia Berry as co-trustees of the Revocable Intervivos Trust of Marjorie M. Crandall dated February 28, 1991 as restated in full on April 7, 2011 |
| Semillon, Inc. |
| Alexander G. Shaw, Cindy L. Casselman and Fairlane Cleaners, Inc. |
| 3:2015cv01257 |
| June 4, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| San Diego |
| Gonzalo P. Curiel |
| Nita L. Stormes |
| Environmental Matters |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 9607 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
67
ORDER Granting Joint 66 Motion to Dismiss Specific Claims With Prejudice. The claims alleged by Semillon, Inc. DBA Fairlane Cleaners, a California corporation, and Thomas Mullins in its pleading dated August 13, 2015 against Aaron Freiser remai n. The claims alleged by Fairlane Cleaners, Inc. and Alexander Shaw against Aaron Freiser remain. The claims alleged by Alexander Shaw against Semillon, Inc. and Thomas Mullins remain. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 8/31/16. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg).
|
|
Filing
63
ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part Semillon and Mullin's Ex Parte Application 59 for Judgment Against Fairlane Cleaners, Inc. and Dismissal of Fairlane Cleaners' Counterclaim. The Court DENIES Semillon and Mullin's ex par te motion for judgment on their counterclaim, (Dkt. No. 5). The Court GRANTS Semillon and Mullin's ex parte motion for dismissal of Fairlane's counterclaim against Semillion and Mullin, (Dkt. No. 13), and GRANTS their motion to strike Fai rlane's answer to Semillon and Mullin's counterclaim filed on July 23, 2015, (Dkt. No. 12). The Court also directs the Clerk of Court to enter default against Fairlane. Semillon and Mullin's may file a motion for default judgment wit h the appropriate legal authority and analysis, and supporting evidence for any claimed damages within 30 days of this order. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 8/25/16. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/25/2016: # 1 Rejected Documents) (dlg).
|
|
Filing
43
ORDER Granting 37 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney for Defendants and Counterclaimants Fairlane Cleaners, Inc.; Alexander G. Shaw; and Cindy Casselman. Defendants and Counterclaimants Alexander G. Shaw and Cindy Casselman shall file an order fo r substitution of counsel or notify the Court they intend to proceed in pro per on or before April 18, 2016. The Court grants Fairlane Cleaners, Inc. until April 18, 2016 to obtain substitute counsel and have counsel file a notice of appearance. The Court directs Duckor, Spradling Metzger & Wynne ALC serve a copy of this order on each of the Defendants. The hearing set for March 4, 2016 is vacated. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 3/3/16. (dlg)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
