Flaxel

Flaxel v. Johnson

Good Law
541 F. Supp. 2d 1127·2008 WL 220267·2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5787
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 25, 200805CV1259 JLS (WMC), 05CV1404 JLS (WMC)California9,205 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sammartino, J.

ORDER (1) GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART GEORGE ART BISHOP’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, (2) GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART JOHN PLAXEL’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, (3) GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART KEN MARINAPS MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, and (4) GRANTING DEFENDANT LARRY JOHNSON’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE EXHIBITS

BACKGROUND OF THE PRESENT MOTIONS

On March 31, 2007, plaintiffs George Art Bishop, John Flaxel, and Ken Marinai (together, “moving plaintiffs”) each filed a motion for partial summary judgment. (Doc. Nos. 219, 220, & 221.) Each plaintiffs motion included a thirty-four page memorandum of points and authorities, and the moving plaintiffs jointly lodged 163 exhibits. (Doc. Nos. 223-31.) Those motions were initially set-for hearing on May 29, 2007. This . hearing date was thrice continued — first when attorney John Dratz, Jr. withdrew as counsel for defendants Larry Johnson; Soil Savers, Inc.; Soil Savers of New York, Inc.; Soil Savers of Florida, Inc.; Soil Savers of Florida, LLC; Soil Savers Technologies, Inc.; SSI Holdings, Inc.; and RTJ Enterprises Inc. (“Johnson defendants” )' (Doc. No. 239), the second time upon the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.