Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-canb-4_95-ap-04576/USCOURTS-canb-4_95-ap-04576-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Harlan Carlson
Plaintiff
Marsha Carlson
Plaintiff
Sonja C. Hahnel
Defendant
William G. Hahnel
Defendant

Document Text:

1

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 BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

|

In re |

| No. 92-44414

Sonja C. Hahnel, |

William G. Hahnel, | Chapter 7

|

Debtors. |

______________________________|

|

Harlan Carlson, |

Marsha Carlson, |

|

Plaintiffs, | Adv. Pro. No. 95-04576

|

v. |

|

Sonja C. Hahnel, |

William G. Hahnel, |

|

Defendants. |

______________________________|

MEMORANDUM REGARDING ORDER AFTER HEARING

On May 6, 2015, the court reopened this adversary proceeding 

and a related bankruptcy case. On May 18, 2015, the Defendants 

filed a motion to vacate dismissal and dismiss the adversary 

The following constitutes the order of the court.

Signed August 15, 2015

________________________________________

William J. Lafferty, III

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

August 17, 2015

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 95-04576 Doc# 40 Filed: 08/15/15 Entered: 08/17/15 10:22:39 Page 1 of 3
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

proceeding. The Plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion on 

June 18, 2015. A hearing was held on July 22, 2015, and the 

appearances made at the hearing were noted on the record. At the 

conclusion of the hearing, the court granted the Defendants’

motion, and directed Defendants’ counsel to submit a proposed 

order to the court. A proposed order was submitted to the Clerk 

of Court on July 31, 2015, and defendant’s counsel also submitted 

with the order a copy of a letter dated July 29, 2015, from 

Defendants’ counsel to Plaintiffs’ counsel regarding the form and 

content of the proposed order. The proposed order attached to 

the letter is identical to the proposed order submitted to the 

court. 

After reviewing the letter, it is not clear to the court if 

a dispute exists regarding the form and content of the order. 

The court will enter the proposed order submitted by Defendants’ 

counsel if a response to the July 29 letter is not filed within 

5 business days of the entry of this Memorandum. If any party 

would like to discuss the form and content of the order, the 

party can request a status conference be scheduled. 

*END OF MEMORANDUM*

Case: 95-04576 Doc# 40 Filed: 08/15/15 Entered: 08/17/15 10:22:39 Page 2 of 3
3

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

COURT SERVICE LIST

Joshua D. Brysk

Law Offices of James G. Schwartz

7901 Stoneridge Dr. #401

Pleasanton, CA 94588

Erik A. Humber

Law Offices of Erik A. Humber

145 A St.

P.O. Box 440

Point Reyes Station, CA 94956

Case: 95-04576 Doc# 40 Filed: 08/15/15 Entered: 08/17/15 10:22:39 Page 3 of 3