From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Meeker v. Meeker

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California
Nov 5, 2004
C 02-00741 JSW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 5, 2004)

Opinion

         RIMAC & MARTIN, a Professional Corporation, JOSEPH M. RIMAC - State Bar No. 72381, WILLIAM REILLY - State Bar No. 177550, KEVIN GILL - State Bar No. 226819, San Francisco, California, Attorneys for Plaintiff, CHARLES R. MEEKER.

          ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY By: MICHAEL IOANNOU, Attorneys for Defendants, MARTIN MEEKER, AHLGREN VINEYARD, PELICAN RANCH WINERY, SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAIN VINEYARD, SAVANNAH-CHANELLE VINEYARDS.


         JOINT STIPULATION TO REMOVE CONFIDENTIAL DESIGNATION FROM CERTAIN EXHIBITS THAT WERE FILED UNDER SEAL AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

          JEFFREY S. WHITE, District Judge.

         At the October, 29, 2004 hearing on plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, the parties agreed that certain emails produced by defendant Martin Meeker should not be designated as confidential and/or filed under seal. Judge White requested that the parties submit a stipulation and order on or before November 5, 2004 that identified which emails produced by defendant Martin Meeker should not be designated as confidential and/or filed under seal.

         Plaintiff CHARLES R. MEEKER, dba THE MEEKER VINEYARD (hereinafter "Plaintiff") and defendants MARTIN MEEKER, AHLGREN VINEYARD, PELICAN RANCH WINERY, SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAIN VINEYARD, SAVANNAH-CHANEL VINEYARDS (hereinafter collectively "Defendants") by and through their counsel hereby stipulate that the following emails produced by defendant Martin Meeker should not be designated as confidential and/or filed under seal:

1. Exhibit A (emails Bates Stamped MM 0553-0753) of the Declaration of Counsel in Support of Plaintiff's Motion to Reconsider Summary Judgment under F.R.C.P. 59(e) filed on July 20, 2004.

2. Exhibits "B, " "C" and "E" to the Declaration of Michael Ioannou filed in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Reconsider Denial of His Summary Judgment Motion under F.R.C.P. 59(e) filed on October 8, 2004

         Pursuant to local rules, this document is being electronically filed through the Court's ECF System. In this regard, counsel for Plaintiff hereby attests that (1) the content of this document is acceptable to all persons required to sign the document; (2) Defendants' counsel has signed this document; and (3) the signed document is available for inspection upon request.

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

          ORDER

         The request in the stipulation filed on November 5, 2004 in the above captioned case is GRANTED.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Meeker v. Meeker

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California
Nov 5, 2004
C 02-00741 JSW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 5, 2004)
Case details for

Meeker v. Meeker

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES R. MEEKER, dba THE MEEKER VINEYARD, Plaintiff, v. MARTIN MEEKER…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California

Date published: Nov 5, 2004

Citations

C 02-00741 JSW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 5, 2004)