Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-06887/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-06887-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 140
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instruments
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PEPI SHAFLER, RELATED CASES

Plaintiff(s), No. C 06-5908 PJH

No. C 06-6887 PJH

v.

VEXATIOUS LITIGANT ORDER

HSBC BANK USA, et al.,

Defendant(s).

_______________________________/

For the reasons stated in the court’s February 21, 2007 order, plaintiff Pepi Schafler

is declared a vexatious litigant. The court hereby orders as follows:

1. Plaintiff is enjoined from filing any action in the United States District Court for

the Northern District of California against HSBC, Manufacturers and Traders Trust

Company Bank (M&T), Scott D. Miller, and Cheryl Storie or any of their employees, agents,

attorneys, affiliates, subsidiaries, parents, successors, or predecessors that arise out of or

is in any way related to the alleged unlawful conversion of her funds in November of 1985,

unless and until such an action is first approved by the court.

2. To obtain the approval of the court to file an action against any of the

individuals identified above, plaintiff must first file an application which shall include the

proposed complaint, the evidence that supports the allegations in the complaint or in the

absence of such evidence, a declaration setting forth a good faith basis for concluding that

she can obtain the evidence necessary to support her allegations. The application will be

assigned to Judge Hamilton unless the Chief Judge of the Northern District assigns another

judge for this purpose. A copy of the application shall be sent by overnight mail to the

defendants whom plaintiff intends to include in her complaint. The parties will be given 15

Case 4:06-cv-06887-PJH Document 24 Filed 02/21/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

days from the date of service to respond to the application.

3. In deciding whether to allow plaintiff to proceed with any new action, the court

will consider whether the new action raises any issues that could have been raised in any

of the previous actions. The court may, in its discretion, require that plaintiff post a bond in

the amount of the fees and costs that the defendants will likely incur in defending against

the action. If the defendants prevail in the action, they will be entitled to be compensated

out of this bond for the fees and costs incurred in defending against plaintiff’s action,

notwithstanding any other provisions of the state or federal law limiting the right to recover

attorneys’ fees and costs. 

IT IS SO ORDERED

Dated: February 21, 2007 

 

Phyllis J. Hamilton

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-06887-PJH Document 24 Filed 02/21/07 Page 2 of 2