Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01821/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01821-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Harry D. Wilson, Inc.
Defendant
Edna Hess
Plaintiff
Madera Honda Suzuki
Defendant
Robert D. Wilson
Defendant

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDNA HESS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MADERA HONDA SUZUKI; HARRY D. )

WILSON, INC.; ROBERT D. WILSON; )

and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

1:10-cv-01821-AWI-BAM

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES

TO PROVIDE FURTHER

BRIEFING

The Court refers the parties to previous orders for a complete chronology of the proceedings.

Plaintiff Edna Hess (“Plaintiff”) has filed a complaint against defendants Madera Honda Suzuki,

Harry D. Wilson, Inc., Robert D. Wilson (collectively “Defendants”) and Does 1 through 10,

inclusive, for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the California Labor Code. On July 13,

2012, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication in the alternative

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. The Court took the matter under submission on

August 14, 2012. Having reviewed the pleadings of record and all competent and admissible

evidence submitted, the Court now finds the matter warrants additional briefing on the corporate

status of HarryD. Wilson, Inc., dba Madera Honda Suzuki, the entity in which Plaintiff – along with

her husband, Terry Hess, defendant Robert Wilson and his wife Lisa Wilson – is alleged to have

been a shareholder. In particular, the Court directs the parties to provide information about the type

Case 1:10-cv-01821-AWI-BAM Document 35 Filed 08/24/12 Page 1 of 2
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

of corporation Harry D. Wilson, Inc., is currently registered as (e.g., general stock, close,

professional, S corp, C corp, etc.) as well as copies of documents for corporate formation that were

required to have been filed with the California Secretary of State and/or the Securities and Exchange

Commission. The parties shall have through 4:00 p.m. Friday, September 7, 2012 to file such

information with the Court. If there is no dispute regarding these issues, the parties may file a joint

brief. Otherwise, the parties may file separate briefs. If separate briefs are filed, each party shall

have through 4:00 p.m. Friday, September 14, 2012 to file a response to the opposing party’s brief. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 24, 2012 

0m8i78 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

2

Case 1:10-cv-01821-AWI-BAM Document 35 Filed 08/24/12 Page 2 of 2