From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stagnaro v. Home Depot U.S.A. Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION
Nov 8, 2011
CASE NO. CV11-3359 RSWL (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. CV11-3359 RSWL (MANx)

11-08-2011

JOHN STAGNARO, an individual, Plaintiff, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, Defendants.

Keith A. Fink, Bar No. 146841 Sarah E. Hernandez. Bar No. 206305 Jennifer M. Misetich, Bar No. 272022 FINK & STEINBERG Attorneys at Law Attorneys for Plaintiff JOHN STAGNARO


Keith A. Fink, Bar No. 146841

Sarah E. Hernandez. Bar No. 206305

Jennifer M. Misetich, Bar No. 272022

FINK & STEINBERG

Attorneys at Law

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JOHN STAGNARO

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT AGAINST

DEFENDANT HOME DEPOT, U.S.A.,

INC.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

Pursuant to the terms of the Defendant HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC.'S statutory offer to compromise pursuant to Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff JOHN STAGNARO and against Defendant HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC, in the amount of $10,000.00 plus attorneys' fees and costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

HONORABLE GARY A. FEESS

Respectfully Submitted by:

Keith A. Fink, Bar No. 146841

Sarah E. Hernandez. Bar No. 206305

Jennifer M. Misetich, Bar No. 272022

FINK & STEINBERG

Attorneys at Law

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JOHN STAGNARO

PROOF OF SERVICE


STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is: 11500 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 316, Los Angeles, California, 90064.

On November 8, 2011, I served the document described as [PROPOSED] JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT HOME DEPOT, U.S.A., INC. on all interested parties in their action as follows:

[X] by placing [ ] the original [X] true copies thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows:

Andrew J. Jaramillo

Daniel A. Adlong

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &

STEWART, P.C.

Park Towen Suite 1500

695 Town Center Drive

Costa Mesa, CA 92626

[X] BY MAIL

[X] As follows: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice for collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Los Angeles, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.

[ ] (BY PERSONAL SERVICE) I delivered such envelope by hand to the offices of the addressee.

[X] BY FACSIMILE

Using fax number (310) 268-0790 I transmitted such document by facsimile machine, pursuant to California Rules of Court 2001 et seq. The facsimile machine complied with Rule 2003(3). The transmission was reported as complete. I caused the machine to print a transmission report of the transmission, a copy of which is attached to the declaration. I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.

[ ] (STATE) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct.

[X] (FEDERAL) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of the court at whose direction the service was made.

____________

Heather Silldor


Summaries of

Stagnaro v. Home Depot U.S.A. Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION
Nov 8, 2011
CASE NO. CV11-3359 RSWL (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)
Case details for

Stagnaro v. Home Depot U.S.A. Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOHN STAGNARO, an individual, Plaintiff, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC, a…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Nov 8, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. CV11-3359 RSWL (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)