Legal Opinion
Naiman v. Adjustable Bedding Concepts, Inc.
District Court, E.D. California
Decided August 31, 2020No. 2:19-cv-00702Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SIDNEY NAIMAN, 12 Plaintiff, No. 2:19-cv-0702 MCE DB 13 v. 14 ADJUSTABLE BEDDING CONCEPTS, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS INC., D/B/A/ EASY REST, 15 16 Defendant. 17 18 This matter came before the undersigned on December 6, 2019, pursuant to Local Rule 19 302(c)(19), for hearing of plaintiff’s motion for default judgment. (ECF No. 12.) Attorney 20 Timothy Sostrin appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. No appearance was made on behalf of the 21 defendant. At that time, oral argument was heard and the motion was…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Gary R. Eitel v. William D. McCoolCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Alvera M. Aldabe v. Charles D. AldabeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Televideo Systems, Inc. K. Philip Hwang C. Gemma Hwang v. Fred P. Heidenthal, Individually and Dba South Harbor Investors and West Cliff SecuritiesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Pepsico, Inc. v. California Security CansDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2002
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.