Hamerslag

Scottsdale Insurance Company v. Hamerslag

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 9, 20233:23-cv-00780California2,686 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE Case No.: 23-CV-780 JLS (AHG)

COMPANY,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

Plaintiff, DENYING IN PART, PURSUANT TO v. CIVIL LOCAL RULE 7.1(f)(3)(c),

PERSPECTIUM CORPORATION’S

STEVEN HAMERSLAG and MOTION TO SET ASIDE ENTRY

PERSPECTIUM CORP.,

OF DEFAULT OR,

16 Defendants. ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS

18 (ECF Nos. 4, 7, 8) 19 Presently before the Court is Defendant Perspectium Corporation’s (“Perspectium”) Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss (“Mot.,” ECF No. 8). Plaintiff Scottsdale Insurance Company did not file a response to the Motion. See generally Docket. On August 4, 2023, the Court took the Motion under submission without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). See ECF No. 12. Having carefully considered Perspectium’s arguments and the applicable law, the Court GRANTS…

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.