arrow left
arrow right
  • JOHN HAMILTON VS DOE 1 NEEDLEMAN, ET AL. Other Breach of Contract/Warranty (not fraud or negligence) (General Jurisdiction) document preview
  • JOHN HAMILTON VS DOE 1 NEEDLEMAN, ET AL. Other Breach of Contract/Warranty (not fraud or negligence) (General Jurisdiction) document preview
						
                                

Preview

Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 03/22/2021 11:30 AM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by S. Bolden,Deputy Clerk CM-110 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY STEVEN E. BURTON, ESQ. 93590 SPECIALE & BURTON, APC 21243 VENTURA BLVD., SUITE 210 WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91364 TELEPHONE NO.: (818) 884-8525 FAX NO.(Optional): (818) 884-0806 E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional): sburton@speciale-burton.com ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Defendant Needelman and Bennett SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STREET ADDRESS: 111 NORTH HILL STREET MAILING ADDRESS: LOS ANGELES, CA 90012 CITY AND ZIP CODE: BRANCH NAME:CENTRAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: JOHN HAMILTON DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: DOE 1 NEEDELMAN, DOE 2 BENNETT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NUMBER: (Check one): ‰ X UNLIMITED CASE ‰ LIMITED CASE 20STCV30203 (Amount demanded (Amount demanded is $25,000 exceeds $25,000) or less) A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is scheduled as follows: Date: APRIL 9, 2021 Time: 8:30 AM Dept.: 26 Div.: Room: Address of court (if different from the address above): ‰ X Notice of Intent to Appear by Telephone, by (name): STEVEN E. BURTON INSTRUCTIONS: All applicable boxes must be checked, and the specified information must be provided. 1. Party or parties (answer one): a. ‰ X This statement is submitted by party (name): DEFENDANTS, MICHAEL BENNETT AND CHET NEEDELMAN b. ‰ This statement is submitted jointly by parties (names): 2. Complaint and cross-complaint (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only) a. The complaint was filed on (date): b. ‰ The cross-complaint, if any, was filed on (date): 3. Service (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only) a. ‰ All parties named in the complaint and cross-complaint have been served, have appeared, or have been dismissed. b. ‰ The following parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint (1) ‰ have not been served (specify names and explain why not): (2) ‰ have been served but have not appeared and have not been dismissed (specify names): (3) ‰ have had a default entered against them (specify names): c. ‰ The following additional parties may be added (specify names, nature of involvement in case, and the date by which they may be served): 4. Description of case ‰ X complaint ‰ cross-complaint a. Type of case in (Describe, including causes of action): 1. Breach of Contract Damages; 2. Foreclosure Mechanic's Lien; 3. Violation of Business & Prof. Code Section 17200 Page 1 of 5 Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Judicial Council of California CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.720-3.730 CM-110 [Rev. July 1, 2011] www.courts.ca.gov BENNETT