Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Harris v. U.S. Bankcorp

United States District Court, W.D. Washington

October 31, 2019

CONNIE HARRIS, KRISTI SCOCCO, SUSAN SARTAIN, MARY MIHOVILICH, DAVID ASUNCION, BRIAN JAEGER, JUDY JAEGER, MARY CANTU, KRISTEN WEISE, DAIN PEEZ, KATRINA JOHNSON, CATHERINE CLEMENS, MARK MILLER, MARY MIOTKE, DALE DOYON, AARON HEINTZMAN, SARA MCNAMARA, ERIN BAST, and MARIA SAGISI GEISS, as individuals, Plaintiffs,
v.
U.S. BANKCORP, BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., & KEYCORP, national banking associations, Defendants.

          McDougald Law Group P.S. Shannon McDougald, Esq. Trent Latta, Esq. Counsel to KeyCorp.

          Dorsey & Whitney LLP Shawn Larsen-Bright Alexandra Johnston Counsel to U.S. Bank National Association

          Attorney West Seattle Eric J. Harrison Counsel to Plaintiffs

          Andrews Lagasse Branch Bell Kelly Drew Folger Counsel to Bank of America

          STIPULATION & ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL AND EXTENDING DEADLINES

          Barbara Jacobs Rothstein U.S. District Court Judge.

         Stipulation

         The parties, through their respective counsel, hereby STIPULATE and AGREE as follows:

         1. On or about February 28, 2019, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint in this matter, Case No. 2:19-cv-291-BJR. (Dkt. #1.)

         2. On or about April 1, 2019, Defendant KeyCorp. filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint. (Dkt. #10.)

         3. On or about April 11, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint. (Dkt. #11.)

         4. On or about May 8, 2019, the Court issued its Standing Order, which scheduled several deadlines. (Dkt. #19.)

         5. On June 17, August 1, and September 13, 2019, the parties filed joint stipulations and proposed Orders extending the deadline to file Amended Pleadings. (See Dkts. #22, 26, 31.) On each occasion, the parties noted that, without the benefit of the Court's ruling on motions before it, the parties were unable to effectively conduct pretrial discovery, to effectively prepare expert witnesses, and to amend their pleadings to assert counterclaims, cross claims, or third-party claims. In addition, the parties were unable to fully analyze potential pretrial resolution issues. (See Dkts. #22, 26, 31.)

         6. The Court granted each stipulation. (See Dkt. #25, 28, 32.)

         7. On or about October 18, 2019, Defendants filed a joint letter with the Court requesting a decision on motions ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.