Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04945/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04945-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FIDELITY AND GUARANTY INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v

RCMC, INC, et al,

Defendants.

 /

No C 06-4945 VRW

ORDER

Plaintiff, by ex parte motion pursuant to FRCP 64 and

California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) §485.210, seeks writs of

attachment for ten pieces of real estate owned by individual

defendants. Doc #29. In the alternative, plaintiff requests a

temporary protective order prohibiting defendants from transferring

or encumbering, directly or indirectly, any interest in non-exempt

property. Id at 11. 

Defendants Douglas Y Anderson, Marla N Anderson, Michael

A Soave, Martha S Soave, Richard M Moser and Jacoba P Moser filed

an opposition memorandum on September 13, 2006. Doc #46. 

Case 3:06-cv-04945-VRW Document 61 Filed 10/02/06 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

Defendants RCMC, Inc, Peter A Richardson, Helon L Chichester, James

W Lamber, Clifford M McClure and Diana McClure filed a separate

opposition memorandum on September 14, 2006. Doc #49. Defendants’

opposition papers primarily challenged the requirement that an ex

parte motion show great or irreparable injury pursuant to Cal Code

Civ Proc (“CCP”) §485.010. Plaintiff responded with a reply and a

supplemental declaration from James D Curran that included specific

allegations with independent document evidence that were not

included in plaintiff’s original motion. Docs #56, #57.

Because every defendant has now filed opposition the

matter is no longer subject to the ex parte procedure contemplated

by CCP §485.010. Plaintiff’s applications for writs of attachment

will, therefore, be evaluated pursuant to CCP §484.090, governing

the issuance of writs of attachment pursuant to noticed

applications. 

The court will allow defendants to submit surreply

memoranda on or before October 10, 2006. This matter will be

decided upon the papers unless the court otherwise orders.

SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:06-cv-04945-VRW Document 61 Filed 10/02/06 Page 2 of 2