Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00798/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00798-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 423
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Withdrawal 28 USC 157
Cause of Action: 11:101 Bankruptcy

---

-1-

W02-WEST:1TAC1\400145799.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

DEFERRING BRIEFING AND HEARING DATES FOR 

DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES

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

LEO R. BEUS, Admitted pro hac vice

ALBERT J. MORRISON, Admitted pro hac vice

BEUS GILBERT PLLC

4800 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 6000

Scottsdale, AZ 85251

Telephone: (480) 429-3000

Facsimile: (480) 429-3100

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JOSEPH F. COYNE, JR., Cal. Bar No. 93707

MICHELLE SHERMAN, Cal. Bar No. 136799

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

333 South Hope Street, 48th Floor

Los Angeles, California 90071-1448

Telephone: 213-620-1780

Facsimile: 213-620-1398

Attorneys for Defendants 

FORT JAMES CORPORATION

AND RELATED ENTITIES

JAMES C. KRIEG, Cal. Bar No. 77069

STAN G. ROMAN, Cal. Bar No. 87652

KRIEG, KELLER, SLOAN, REILLEY & 

ROMAN LLP

114 Sansome Street, 7th Floor

San Francisco, California 94104

Telephone: (415) 249-8330

Facsimile: (415) 249-8333

Attorneys for Defendant MCGUIRE 

WOODS LLP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

JEFFREY H. BECK, Liquidating 

Trustee of the Crown Paper Liquidating 

Trust,

Plaintiff,

vs.

FORT JAMES CORPORATION;

FORT JAMES OPERATING 

COMPANY; FORT JAMES FIBER 

COMPANY; FORT JAMES 

INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD; 

AND MCGUIREWOODS, LLP,

Defendants.

Case No. C 05-0798 MMC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER DEFERRING BRIEFING 

AND HEARING DATES FOR 

DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR 

ATTORNEYS' FEES

Courtroom: 7 (19th Floor) Judge: Hon. Maxine M. Chesney

Case 3:05-cv-00798-MMC Document 62 Filed 12/22/06 Page 1 of 4
-2-

W02-WEST:1TAC1\400145799.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

DEFERRING BRIEFING AND HEARING DATES FOR 

DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES

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

Pursuant to Rule 6-2 of the Local Rules of the Northern District of 

California and FRCP 54(d)(2), plaintiff Jeffrey H. Beck, Liquidating Trustee 

("Plaintiff"), and defendants Fort James Operating Company, Fort James Fiber 

Company, and Fort James International Holdings, Ltd., (collectively, "Fort James 

Defendants") and McGuireWoods LLP ("MW," and collectively with the Fort James 

Defendants, "Defendants", and collectively with the Fort James Defendants and 

Plaintiff, the "Parties") stipulate as follows and respectfully request that the Court 

enter the Parties' proposed order appended hereto.

WHEREAS, on December 14, 2006, the Court entered judgment in this 

Action in favor of Defendants;

WHEREAS, pursuant to FRCP 54(d)(2) and Local Rule 54-6, motions

for attorneys' fees must be filed no later than 14 days after entry of judgment, but the 

time can be extended by stipulation and order;

WHEREAS, without a stipulation and order extending the time,

Defendants would have to file attorneys' fees motions no later than December 28, 

2006;

WHEREAS, on December 15, 2006, the Court heard and took under 

submission, among other things, the Fort James Defendants' Motion for Summary

Judgment on Count II of Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint (Fraudulent

Transfer Claim Relating to 1998 Option and Settlement Agreement ("OSA")) in the 

related action, Crown Paper Company v. Fort James Corporation, Case No. C 02-

3838 MMC ("Count II Summary Judgment Motion"); 

Case 3:05-cv-00798-MMC Document 62 Filed 12/22/06 Page 2 of 4
-3-

W02-WEST:1TAC1\400145799.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

DEFERRING BRIEFING AND HEARING DATES FOR 

DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES

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

WHEREAS, Defendants' right to recover attorneys' fees incurred in this 

Action potentially depends upon the enforceability and validity of the OSA, which 

will not be determined (i) unless and until the Court grants the Court II Summary 

Judgment Motion, or (ii) until a resolution through trial (which is scheduled to 

commence on February 5, 2007) if the Court denies the Count II Summary 

Judgment Motion;

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the Parties and the Court should not 

go through the time and expense of briefing, arguing, and hearing attorneys' fees 

motions in this Action before the Court has ruled on Plaintiff's claim that the OSA is 

avoidable as a fraudulent transfer;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED that Defendants' time to file 

attorneys' fees motions in this Action shall be extended, so that Defendants shall file 

attorneys' fees motions no later than 14 days after (i) the Court grants the Count II 

Summary Judgment Motion if the Court grants the Count II Summary Judgment 

Motion, or (ii) the Court enters judgment on Count II of the Second Amended 

Complaint if the Court denies the Count II Summary Judgment Motion.

BEUS GILBERT PLLC

By /s/ Albert J. Morrison

DATED: December 20, 2006

Albert J. Morrison

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 3:05-cv-00798-MMC Document 62 Filed 12/22/06 Page 3 of 4
-4-

W02-WEST:1TAC1\400145799.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

DEFERRING BRIEFING AND HEARING DATES FOR 

DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES

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

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

By /s/ Theodore A. Cohen

DATED: December 20, 2006

Theodore A. Cohen

Attorneys for Fort James Defendants

KRIEG, KELLER, SLOAN, REILLEY & ROMAN 

LLP

By /s/ James C. Krieg

DATED: December 20, 2006

James C. Krieg

Attorneys for Def. MCGUIRE WOODS LLP

Good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' time to file attorneys' fees 

motions in this Action shall be extended, so that Defendants shall file attorneys' fees 

motions no later than 14 days after (i) the Court grants the Count II Summary 

Judgment Motion if the Court grants the Count II Summary Judgment Motion, or 

(ii) the Court enters judgment on Count II of the Second Amended Complaint if the 

Court denies the Count II Summary Judgment Motion.

DATED: December __, 2006

Hon. Maxine M. Chesney

United States District Judge

22

Case 3:05-cv-00798-MMC Document 62 Filed 12/22/06 Page 4 of 4