arrow left
arrow right
  • POWELL VS WASCO RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT ET AL23-CV Other PI/PD/WD - Civil Unlimited document preview
  • POWELL VS WASCO RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT ET AL23-CV Other PI/PD/WD - Civil Unlimited document preview
  • POWELL VS WASCO RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT ET AL23-CV Other PI/PD/WD - Civil Unlimited document preview
  • POWELL VS WASCO RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT ET AL23-CV Other PI/PD/WD - Civil Unlimited document preview
  • POWELL VS WASCO RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT ET AL23-CV Other PI/PD/WD - Civil Unlimited document preview
  • POWELL VS WASCO RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT ET AL23-CV Other PI/PD/WD - Civil Unlimited document preview
						
                                

Preview

ROBINSON & KELLAR ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3434 TRUXTUN AVENUE, SUITE 150 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 TELEPHONE (661) 323-8277 FAX (661) 323-4205 MICHAEL C. KELLAR SBN: 80251 6 Attorneys for Defendant, CITY OF WASCO [EXEMPT FROM FILING FEE - GOVERNMENT CODE Il 6103] SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF KERN - METROPOLITAN DIVISION 10 11 TYNA POWELL, ) Case No. BCV-22-100328-BCB ) 12 P lainti ff, ) CERTIFICATE OF INABILITY TO ) RESPOND; [PROPOSED] ORDER 13 vs. ) ) 14 WASCO RECREATION AND PARK ) DISTRICT; CITY OF WASCO; COUNTY ) 15 OF KERN, and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, ) ) 16 Defendants. ) ) 17 18 Icertify that I am counsel for the CITY OF WASCO, a named Defendant in the case, and 19 further that I cannot with due diligence answer or otherwise respond in the case as of this date for 20 the following reasons: 21 This matter was just recently received in our office for representation of Defendant, CITY 22 OF WASCO, and I have not had an opportunity to properly review the file and prepare an 23 appropriate responsive pleading. Therefore, Defendant CITY OF WASCO respectfully requests, 24 in the furtherance of justice, an additional thirty (30) days within which to file a responsive pleading, 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// CERTIFICATE OF INABILITY TO RESPOND; [PROPOSED] ORDER I pursuant to Code Of Civil Procedure, Section 473(a)(1). Date: April 18, 2022 ROBINSON & KELLAR MICHAEL C. KELLAR Attorneys for Defendant, CITY OF WASCO ORDER 10 REQUEST: GRANTED: TO: DENIED: 12 13 DATED; 14 15 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 CERTIFICATE OF INABILITY TO RESPOND; [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KERN ) I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within entitled action. My business address is 3434 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 150, Bakersfield, California 93301. On April 18, 2022, Iserved the within CERTIFICATE OF INABILITY TO RESPOND; PROPOSED ORDER, on the interested parties in said action by placing a true and correct copy thereof for delivery or deposit as follows: 10 Matthew C. Clark, Esq. Doug Fitz-Simmons, Esq. CHAIN COHN STILES 12 1731 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 13 Email: service chainlaw.corn 14 XXX [BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSIONJ Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure, 16 Section 1010.6, this document is being served by e-mailing the document to the individual(s) listed th usin - elect 'l dd onic mail. btd b . Addhtio tty,th d Aphysicalcopywillbeprovideduponrequestonly. t y d b ~db Noelectronicauto- reply message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. 17 XXX [STATE] I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 18 foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at Bakersfield, California on April 18, 2022. 19 t 20 MARC c ARTHY 21 22 POWELL VS. WASCO et al 23 24 25 26 27 28