Legal Opinion
Produce Pay, Inc. v. FVF Distributors Inc.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided May 3, 2022No. 3:20-cv-00517Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PRODUCE PAY, INC., Case No. 20-cv-517-MMA (BGS) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 13 v. DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT 14 FVF DISTRIBUTORS INC., et al., 15 Defendants. [Doc. No. 62] 16 17 On September 13, 2021, Plaintiff Produce Pay, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed a motion for 18 judgment pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6. The motion is 19 unopposed to date. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS IN PART and 20 DENIES IN PART Plaintiff’s motion. 21 I.…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Maximo Hilao, Class v. Estate of Ferdinand Marcos, and Imelda R. Marcos Ferdinand R. Marcos, Representatives of the Estate of Ferdinand MarcosCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Levy v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- C. Gilmore v. C. LockardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Callie v. NearCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.