Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03805/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03805-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

Case No. 13-cv-03805 NC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID M. CURLEY, SR.,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

WELLS FARGO & CO., and others,

 Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-03805 NC

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO 

SPECIFIC ARGUMENTS IN 

PREPARATION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT HEARING

Re: Dkt. No. 128

The Court provides notice that the parties should be prepared to address two 

particular arguments raised in plaintiff’s supplemental opposition, Dkt. No. 128.

First, Curley objects to the declaration of Alisha Mulder under Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure 26 and 37, asserting that she was not disclosed by Wells Fargo as a witness. 

Under Rule 37(c), if a party fails to identify a witness as required by the rules, then the 

party is not allowed to use that witness to provide evidence in a summary judgment motion, 

“unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c).

Second, Curley cites four state cases on page three that he says stand for the 

proposition that “one cannot continue to deal with a person and then retroactively assert 

there was a material breach so as to excuse their performance.”

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: July 21, 2015

_________________________ Nathanael M. Cousins

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:13-cv-03805-NC Document 133 Filed 07/21/15 Page 1 of 1