Opinion
BK-03-52103-GWZ, BK-03-52790-GWZ, Jointly Administered under BK-03-52103-GWZ.
September 27, 2004
Craig D. Hansen (AZ Bar No. 007405), Sean T. Cork (CA Bar No. 211963), Thomas J. Salerno (AZ Bar No. 007492, SQUIRE, SANDERS DEMPSEY L.L.P., Phoenix, Arizona, Attorneys for Reorganized AMERCO and Reorganized AREC.
Bruce T. Beesley (NV Bar No. 1164), Bridget R. Peck (NV Bar No. 3143), BEESLEY, PECK MATTEONI, LTD., Reno, Nevada, Co-Counsel for Reorganized AMERCO and Reorganized AREC.
STIPULATION
AMERCO and Amerco Real Estate Company, reorganized debtors in the above-captioned, jointly administered chapter 11 cases (the "Reorganized Debtors"), and the Sayers Group, individually and as Lead Plaintiff in the In re AMERCO Securities Litigation (the "Sayers Group"), through their respective counsel, stipulate and agree as follows:
GENERAL BACKGROUND
1. AMERCO commenced its bankruptcy proceeding on June 20, 2003 (the
2. "AMERCO Petition Date"), under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code (the "Bankruptcy Code"). Amerco Real Estate Company ( "AREC") commenced its Chapter 11 bankruptcy case on August 13, 2003 (the "AREC Petition Date").
3. On February 20, 2004, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order (the "Confirmation Order") (Docket No. 796) confirming the Debtors' First Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization (the "Plan"). The Plan became effective on March 15, 2004 (the "Effective Date").
4. On September 30, 2003, the Court entered an order (the "Bar Date Order") (Docket No. 415) setting November 10, 2003 as the last date for filing proofs of claim in these Chapter 11 cases (the "Bar Date"). The Bar Date Order provides that proofs of claim filed after the Bar Date will not be allowed in these Chapter 11 cases.
DISTRICT COURT ACTION
5. The matter before the Court relates to the In re AMERCO Securities Litigation, Master File No. CV-N-03-0050-ECR (the "Action"), which is currently pending before the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (the "Nevada District Court"). The Sayers Group was named the Lead Plaintiff in the Action on August 28, 2003. The Action was consolidated from four underlying actions alleging violations of federal securities laws on August 27, 2003.
6. The Action names U-Haul International, Inc. ( "UHI"), Republic Western Insurance Company ( "RepWest"), certain current or former officers and directors of UHI, RepWest and AMERCO (collectively, the "Related Defendants") and Price Waterhouse Coopers LLP ( "PWC"). Neither AMERCO nor AREC was named as a defendant in the Action, in accordance with the dictates of 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) and the terms of the Confirmation Order, although AMERCO was named in complaints filed before the AMERCO Petition Date and before the filing of the consolidated amended complaint in the Action.
7. UHI and RepWest are both wholly-owned subsidiaries of AMERCO. Neither UHI nor RepWest are or were debtors in this or any chapter 11 proceeding.
8. As of the date of this Stipulation, the putative class has not been certified by the Nevada District Court, and the Named Defendants have not filed an answer to the complaint. Moreover, on or about March 3, 2004, the Related Defendants filed a motion (the "Transfer Motion") with the Nevada District Court to transfer venue of the Action to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona (the "Arizona District Court"). The plaintiffs are the only party to the Action that opposes the relief requested in the Transfer Motion.
PROOFS OF CLAIM AND OBJECTIONS
9. The Sayers Group filed two proofs of claim in these Chapter 11 cases. Claim No. 443 was filed on November 8, 2003, which asserts a contingent, unliquidated claim against AMERCO in an amount "no less than approximately $314,250.60" (the "Individual Claim"). The basis of the Individual Claim is alleged violations of federal securities laws as set forth in the Action.
10. Claim No. 445 was filed on November 8, 2003, which asserts a contingent, unliquidated claim against AMERCO in an unspecified amount (the "Class Claim", and, together with the Individual Claim, the "Claims"). The alleged factual basis of the Class Claim is identical to those asserted in the Action, i.e., alleged violations of federal securities laws.
11. On April 29, 2004, the Reorganized Debtors filed the "Reorganized Debtors' Objection to Claims of the Sayers Group, as Lead Plaintiff in the In re AMERCO Securities Litigation" (the "Class Objection") (Docket No. 922), and the "Reorganized Debtors' Objection to Claims of the Sayers Group (Individually)" (the "Individual Objection", and, together with the Individual Objection, the "Objections") (Docket No. 920). Both Objections seek the disallowance of the Claims filed by the Sayers Group.
STIPULATION
12. The Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group have engaged in extensive discussions concerning the factual, legal and procedural issues that are relevant to a proper adjudication of the Claims, the Objections, and the Action, and the possibility of resolving certain of those issues on a consensual basis. Specifically, the parties have identified the following issues as ones that may be resolved consensually: (a) establishing a schedule for briefing, discovery and argument on the Objections before the Bankruptcy Court; (b) executing a joint stipulation of facts relevant to the adjudication of the Objections before the Bankruptcy Court; (c) the consolidation of a trial on the merits of the Objections in the event that the Bankruptcy Court determines that the Class Claim was properly filed; (d) the proper forum for litigating the merits of the Claims in the event that the Class Claim is deemed to have been properly filed; and (e) transferring venue of the Action to the Arizona District Court.
13. As a result, the Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group have agreed as follows:
a. the following briefing and discovery schedule is established with regard to the Objections: (i) on or before September 30, 2004, the Sayers Group will file a response to the Objections as they relate to whether the Class Claim was properly filed; (ii) on or before October 8, 2004, the Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group will complete any fact discovery relating to whether the Class Claim was properly filed, if necessary; (iii) on or before October 22, 2004, the Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group will file any briefs in support of their respective positions, and no further or additional briefs will be filed by either party; and (v) an evidentiary hearing relating solely to the issue of whether the Sayers Group properly filed the Class Claim will be held on November 8, 2004, at 10:00 a.m. (the "Evidentiary Hearing"). Moreover, the parties agree that the Evidentiary Hearing shall concern only the issue of whether the Sayers Group properly filed the Class Claim such that it may form the basis of an allowed claim against the Reorganized Debtors' estates. The Evidentiary Hearing shall not involve or address the merits of the Claims or whether the Class may be certified under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7023.
b. The Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group stipulate to the following: (i) neither AMERCO nor AREC are presently named as a defendant in the Action due to the operation of the automatic stay and the discharge injunction imposed in the Confirmation Order; (ii) as of the date of this stipulation, the Nevada District Court has not certified the putative class; (iii) as of the date of this stipulation, the Sayers Group has not moved the Bankruptcy Court to certify the class pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7023; (iv) the Sayers Group was appointed as Lead Plaintiff in the Action on August 28, 2003, and three of the members of the Sayers Group withdrew as members thereof on December 2, 2003; (v) since the filing of the Action the only significant events that have occurred are consolidation, the filing of successive versions of an amended consolidated complaint, the filing of the Transfer Motion by the Related Defendants, the filing of an opposition to the Transfer Motion by the plaintiffs in the Action, and the filing of a response by the Related Defendants; (vi) no discovery has been taken in the Action; and (vii) no answers, motions to dismiss, or other dispositive motions have been filed with the Nevada District Court.
c. In the event that the Bankruptcy Court determines that the Sayers Group properly filed the Class Claim such that the only issues remaining to be resolved are those relating to the merits underlying the Class Claim and the certification of the Class, the parties agree that: (i) all further matters in the Bankruptcy Court concerning the Claims and the Objections shall be continued and held in abeyance; (ii) the Claims shall be consolidated for the sole purpose of adjudicating the merits of those claims and, if necessary, certification of the Class; (iii) that the proper forum to adjudicate the merits of the Claims is the Arizona District Court; and (iv) that this agreement is contingent upon the Nevada District Court entering an order substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" transferring the Action to the Arizona District Court.
d. In the event that the Bankruptcy Court determines that the Sayers Group properly filed the Class Claim, the parties agree that: (i) a stipulated order withdrawing the reference of jurisdiction as to the Claims shall be entered by the Nevada District Court or, if transferred, the Arizona District Court, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; and (ii) the parties shall use their best efforts to ensure that the Nevada District Court or, if transferred, the Arizona District Court, enters the stipulated order attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
e. The parties agree that: (i) the Sayers Group will withdraw its opposition to the Transfer Motion and stipulate that venue of the Action should be changed to the Arizona District Court; (ii) the parties will use their best efforts to ensure that the Nevada District Court enters an order transferring venue of the Action to the Arizona District Court, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B"; and (iii) that this Stipulation and Stipulated Order shall be vacated, and have no further effect (except as to the provisions of paragraphs 12(a) and 12(b) above) if the Nevada District Court does not enter an order substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" transferring venue of the Action to the Arizona District Court.
14. Accordingly, the parties stipulate to the proposed Order set forth below that sets forth the above-described stipulation.
WHEREFORE, the parties request an order approving and granting relief consistent with this Stipulation.
ORDER
Based on the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing,
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Scheduling. The following schedule is established in regard to the Claims and the Objections:
a. On or before September 30, 2004, the Sayers Group shall file a response to the Objections as they relate to whether the Class Claim was properly filed.
b. On or before October 8, 2004, the Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group will complete any fact discovery relating to whether the Class Claim was properly filed, if necessary.
c. On or before October 22, 2004, the Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group will file any briefs in support of their respective positions. No further or additional briefs will be filed by either party.
d. On November 8, 2004, at 10:00 a.m. P.D.T., the Court shall conduct an evidentiary hearing on the Claims and the Objections such hearing to be continued from time to time as necessary. The evidentiary hearing shall concern only the issue of whether the Sayers Group properly filed the Class Claim such that it may form the basis of an allowed claim against the Reorganized Debtors' estates and shall not involve or address the merits of whether the Class may be certified under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7023.
2. Joint Stipulation of Fact. The Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group stipulate to the following facts:
a. Neither AMERCO nor AREC are presently named as a defendant in the Action due to the operation of the automatic stay and the discharge injunction imposed in the Confirmation Order.
b. As of the date of this stipulation, the Nevada District Court has not certified the putative class.
c. As of the date of this stipulation, the Sayers Group has not moved the Bankruptcy Court to certify the Class pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7023.
d. The Sayers Group was appointed as Lead Plaintiff in the Action on August 28, 2003, and three of the members of the Sayers Group withdrew as members thereof on December 2, 2003.
e. Since the filing of the Action, the only significant events that have occurred are consolidation, the filing of successive versions of an amended consolidated complaint, the filing of the Transfer Motion by the Related Defendants, the filing of an opposition to the Transfer Motion by the plaintiffs in the Action, and the filing of a response by the Related Defendants.
f. No discovery has been taken in the Action.
g. No answers, motions to dismiss, or other dispositive motions have been filed with the Nevada District Court.
3. Consolidation of Claims. In the event that the Bankruptcy Court determines that the Sayers Group properly filed the Class Claim such that the only issues remaining to be resolved concerning allowance are those relating to the merits underlying the Class Claim and certification of the Class, the Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group stipulate and agree that:
a. All further matters in the Bankruptcy Court concerning the Claims and the Objections shall be continued and held in abeyance.
b. The Claims shall be consolidated for the sole purpose of adjudicating the merits of those claims and, if necessary, the certification of the Class.
c. The proper forum to adjudicate the merits of the Claims is the Arizona District Court.
d. The provisions of Paragraph 3 of this Stipulated Order are contingent upon the Nevada District Court entering an order substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" transferring the Action to the Arizona District Court.
4. Withdrawal of Reference. In the event that the Bankruptcy Court determines that the Sayers Group properly filed the Class Claim, the parties agree that:
a. A stipulated order withdrawing the reference of jurisdiction as to the Claims shall be entered by the Nevada District Court or, if transferred, the Arizona District Court substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
b. The parties shall use their best efforts to ensure that the Nevada District Court or, if transferred, the Arizona District Court enters the stipulated order attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
5. Transfer of Venue. Regardless and independent of whether the Bankruptcy Court determines that the Sayers Group properly file the Class Claim, the Reorganized Debtors and the Sayers Group agree that:
a. The Sayers Group will withdraw its opposition to the Transfer Motion and stipulate that venue of the Action should be changed to the Arizona District Court.
b. The parties will use their best efforts to ensure that the Nevada District Court enters an order transferring venue of the Action to the Arizona District Court, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
c. This Stipulated Order shall be vacated, and have no further effect (except as to the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Stipulated Order) if the Nevada District Court does not enter an order substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" transferring venue of the Action to the Arizona District Court.
EXHIBIT A STIPULATED ORDER WITHDRAWING REFERENCE (SEE ATTACHED)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
In re Amerco BK-03-52103-GWZ
AMERCO, a Nevada corporation, et al., BK-03-52790-GWZ Debtors. Jointly Administered under BK-03-52103-GWZ
Chapter 11
STIPULATED ORDER WITHDRAWING REFERENCE OF JURISDICTION PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 157(D) AND FEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 5011
This cause is before the Court on the "Joint Motion to Withdraw the Reference of Jurisdiction Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(d) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 5011 " dated ____ (the "Motion") filed by AMERCO and Amerco Real Estate Company ("AREC" and, together with AMERCO, the "Reorganized Debtors"), and the Sayers Group, individually and as Lead Plaintiff in the in re AMERCO Securities Litigation (the "Sayers Group"). The Motion seeks entry of an order, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(d) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure (the "Bankruptcy Rules") 5011, withdrawing the reference of jurisdiction as to Proofs of Claim Nos. 443 and 445 (the "Claims") filed by the Sayers Group in the Reorganized Debtors' Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases.
AMERCO commenced a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding (the "Chapter 11 Case") on June 20, 2003 (the "Petition Date") in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (the "Bankruptcy Court"). The Claims allege that AMERCO violated federal securities laws before the Petition Date, although AMERCO has not been named as a defendant in any lawsuit (filed by the Sayers Group or otherwise) in connection with such allegations by virtue of the dictates of 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) and the terms of the Plan and the Confirmation Order. AMERCO denies these allegations and objects to allowance of the Claims. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 502, the determination as to whether the Claims should be allowed or disallowed requires the consideration of the federal securities laws. For these reasons, AMERCO and the Sayers Group agree that the reference of jurisdiction to the Bankruptcy Court must be withdrawn pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(d).
On ____, 2004, the Bankruptcy Court entered a stipulated order (the "Stipulated Order") that provides, among other things, for the consensual resolution of certain issues concerning the Claims, including, without limitation, an agreement between AMERCO and the Sayers Group that the reference of jurisdiction to the Bankruptcy Court should be withdrawn in the event that the Bankruptcy Court determined that Claim No. 445 was properly filed by the Sayers Group. The Bankruptcy Court entered an order to that effect on or about _____.
Upon a review of the Stipulated Order, the Court finds and concludes that: (a) AMERCO and the Sayers Group agree that the reference of jurisdiction should be withdrawn as to the Claims; (b) the conditions contained in the Stipulated Order providing for the reference of jurisdiction to be withdrawn as to the Claims have been met; (c) determination of the merits of the Claims requires consideration of the federal securities laws, which are non-bankruptcy laws of the United States regulating organizations or activities affecting interstate commerce; and (d) good cause has been shown for granting the relief requested in the Motion;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:
1. The MOTION IS GRANTED.
2. The reference of jurisdiction is hereby withdrawn as to the Claims only.
3. All factual and legal matters concerning the Claims, to the extent they pertain to the liability of the Debtors or the Reorganized Debtors, shall be tried before the bench, without a jury.
4. Subject to paragraph 3, nothing contained herein shall be deemed to constitute a waiver by any party hereto of any right to a jury trial in connection with any claims against any other party.
EXHIBIT B STIPULATED ORDER TRANSFERRING VENUE (SEE ATTACHED)
MELVIN R. GOLDMAN (CA SBN 34097) JACK W. LONDEN (CA SBN 85776) LAWRENCE R. KATZIN (CA SBN 142885) EVAN L. LAND (CA SBN 199320) MORRISON FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522
DANIEL T. HAYWARD (NV SBN 5986) LAXALT NOMURA 50 West Liberty Street, Suite 700 Reno, Nevada 89501 Telephone: (775) 322-1170 Facsimile: (775) 322-1865
Attorneys for Defendants U-HAUL INTERNATIONAL, INC. and REPUBLIC WESTERN INSURANCE CO.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
IN RE AMERCO SECURITIES LITIGATION Master File No. CV-N-03-0050-ECR (RAM)
This Document Relates To: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER:
ALL ACTIONS (1) WITHDRAWING ALL OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE; AND
(2) GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE
RECITALS AND STIPULATION
Case Background
A. WHEREAS, a putative securities class action titled Article Four Trust v. AMERCO, et al., United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Case No. CV-N-03-0050-DWH-VPC was filed on January 28, 2003, on behalf of "all persons and entities . . . who purchased or acquired AMERCO securities . . . between February 12, 1998 and September 26, 2002." It named as defendants AMERCO and ten of its officers and/or directors.
B. WHEREAS, three related cases also were filed in this Court: (1) IG Holdings, Inc. v. AMERCO, et al., United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Case No. CV-N-03-0199-HDM-RAM was filed on January 28, 2003; (2) Maxine Mates v. AMERCO, et al., United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Case No. CV-N-03-0107-ECR-VPC was filed on February 24, 2003; and (3) Edward A. Klug v. AMERCO, et al., United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Case No. CV-S-03-0380-JCM-LRL was filed on April 10, 2003;
C. WHEREAS, on June 20, 2003, AMERCO, a Nevada corporation, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada in the case styled In re AMERCO, Case No. BK-03-52103-GWZ, and that court issued a June 20, 2003 "Order Under 11 U.S.C. §§ 105(a), 362, 1107 and 1108 Confirming Ordinary Course Business Practices and Imposition of Automatic Stay";
D. WHEREAS, on or about August 27, 2003, the Court entered Orders consolidating the aforementioned cases into the present action, "In re AMERCO Securities Litigation," naming the Sayers Group as Lead Plaintiff, and approving the Sayers Group's choice of counsel;
E. WHEREAS, on November 25, 2003, plaintiffs filed the Amended and Consolidated Class Action Complaint;
F. WHEREAS, on May 24, 2004, plaintiffs filed the presently pending Second Amended and Consolidated Class Action Complaint;
G. WHEREAS, as a result of various stipulations and orders, no defendant has filed a response to any of the complaints underlying or in the present action.
The Bankruptcy Proof of Claims
H. WHEREAS, on November 8, 2003, the Sayers Group filed two proofs of claim (the "Proofs of Claim") against AMERCO in the Chapter 11 case that relate to the same factual allegations asserted in these securities litigation proceedings;
I. WHEREAS, on April 29, 2004, AMERCO's restructuring counsel filed objections to the Proofs of Claim (the "Proof Objections").
The Motion to Transfer This Action To The District of Arizona
J. WHEREAS, on March 3, 2004, defendants Edward J. Shoen, Mark V. Shoen, James P. Shoen, Gary B. Horton, William E. Carty, Richard Amoroso, Richard Herrera, Charles J. Bayer, John P. Brogan, John M. Dodds, James J. Grogan, U-Haul International, Inc. and Republic Western Insurance Company ("Moving Defendants") moved this Court for an Order, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), transferring this action to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona (the "Transfer Motion");
K. WHEREAS, on April 7, plaintiffs I.G. Holdings, Inc. and Robert Speckert filed an opposition to the Transfer Motion. (Defendant PricewaterhouseCoopers neither joined in nor opposed the Transfer Motion.);
L. WHEREAS, on April 28, the Moving Defendants filed a reply brief in support of the Transfer Motion;
Stipulation Regarding Venue And The Bankruptcy Proof of Claims
M. WHEREAS, the parties have met and agreed on various issues regarding the Transfer Motion and the Proofs of Claim, including plaintiffs' withdrawal of their opposition to the Transfer Motion and stipulation to the transfer of this action to the District of Arizona;
N. WHEREAS, the parties are contemporaneously filing a stipulation in the Bankruptcy Court (the "Bankruptcy Stipulation") that provides, among other things, for the consensual resolution of certain issues concerning the Proofs of Claim and the Proof Objections and is contingent upon the entry of the proposed order submitted herewith or the otherwise successful transfer of this action to the District of Arizona. A copy of the agreed form of the Bankruptcy Stipulation is attached hereto;
The undersigned parties, by and through their counsel, Stipulate to the Court's entry of the following Order:
ORDER
With their consent, the opposition to the Transfer Motion filed on April 7, 2004 by plaintiffs I.G. Holdings, Inc. and Robert Speckert is hereby withdrawn. For good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), this action is ordered transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Phoenix Division.
Defendants need not file responses to the pending Second Amended Complaint until 30 days after entry of this Order, or seven days after the transferee court serves the parties with notice that the case has been received in the District of Arizona, whichever is later, and unless otherwise ordered by the transferee judge.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: _______________ LAXALT NOMURA, LTD.
___________________________ DANIEL T. HAYWARD (NV SBN 5986) 50 West Liberty Street, Suite 700 Reno, Nevada 89501 Telephone: (775) 322-1170 Facsimile: (775) 322-1865 and MORRISON FOERSTER LLP Jack W. London (CA SBN 85776) Lawrence R. Katzin (CA SBN 142885) 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 Attorneys for U-Haul International and Republic Western Insurance Co.
DATED: __________________ LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS J. HALL
____________________________ THOMAS J. HALL (NV SBN 675) 305 South Arlington Avenue P.O. Box 3948 Reno, Nevada 89501 Telephone: (775) 348-7011 Facsimile: (775) 348-7211 and KAPLAN FOX KILSHEIMER LLP Laurence D. King (CA SBN 206423) 555 Montgomery Street San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 772-4700 and LERACH COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN ROBBINS LLP Samuel H. Rudman Russell Gunyan 200 Broadhollow, Suite 406 Melville, NY 11747 Telephone: (631) 367-7100 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Robert Speckert and IG Holdings
DATED: __________________ MARSHALL HILL CASSAS deLIPKAU
________________________________ REW R. GOODENOW (NV SBN 3722) 333 Holcomb Avenue, Suite 300 Reno, Nevada 89505-2790 Telephone: (775) 323-1601 Facsimile: (775) 348-7250 and IRELL MANELLA LLP Daniel P. Lefler (CA SBN 151253) Charles Elder (CA SBN 186524) 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900 Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone: (310) 277-1010 Attorneys for Defendants Charles J. Bayer, John P. Brogan, John M. Dodds, and James J. Grogan
DATED: __________________ McDONALD CARANO WILSON LLP
________________________________ PAT LUNDVALL (NV SBN 3761) 241 Ridge Street Reno, Nevada 89501 Telephone: (775) 788-2000 Facsimile: (775) 788-2020 and PILLSBURY WINTHROP LLP Walter J. Robinson (CA SBN 40632) Theodore K. Bell (CA SBN 184289) 2475 Hanover Street Palo Alto, California 93404-1114 Telephone: (650) 233-4500 Attorneys for Defendants Edward J. Shoen, Mark V. Shoen, James P. Shoen, Gary B. Horton, William E. Carty and Richard Herrera
DATED: __________________ HALE LANE PEEK DENNISON HOWARD
_________________________________ TIMOTHY A. LUKAS (NV SBN 4678) 5441 Kietzke Lane, Second Floor Reno, NV 89501 and MARISCAL, WEEKS, McINTYRE FRIEDLANDER, P.A. Gary L. Birnbaum Russell Piccoli 2901 North Central Avenue, Suite 200 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2705 Telephone: (602) 285-5000 Attorneys for Defendant Richard M. Amoroso
ORDER
Good cause appearing therefor,
IT IS SO ORDERED.