Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Mccorriston Miller x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Contract: Marine | Hawaii
~Util - Case Stayed ~Util - Set/Clear Flags Link
EO: This Court was informed that Defendant Vawn Crausman filed a bankruptcy petition under Chapter 7 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Central California. See In re Vawn Nicole Crausman, Case No. 2:26-BK-17078-NB. The Petition lists Defendant Vessel "Stormi" as Debtor's "property" and Defendant Stormi Ventures, LLC as Debtor's "defunct business." The Petition also lists this lawsuit as a pending "legal action."
Plaintiff confirms that, by operation of 11 U.S.C. § 362, this litigation is stayed. See ECF No. 63 . The Court FINDS that the claims in this case are subject to the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. § 362(a).
Plaintiff shall file status reports regarding the status of the bankruptcy proceedings and the stay of this case every six months, with the first status report due on 2/3/2027.
(MAGISTRATE JUDGE WES REBER PORTER) (jo)
Personal Property: Other | Hawaii
Link 1 - Terminate Hearings
EO: In June 2026, the Court (1) ordered Plaintiff Authenticity Co. Ltd to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and (2) reopened discovery for the limited purpose of facilitating Authenticity's efforts in that regard. Dkt. Nos. 151 , 159 . On July 29, 2026, Authenticity responded to the Order to Show Cause, asserting that "complete diversity exists between the parties" and submitting evidence it contends supports that position. Dkt. No. 166 . Upon review of the same, the Court DISCHARGES the Order to Show Cause. Because the operative Complaint contains deficient jurisdictional allegations, within 14 days of entry of this Order, Authenticity is instructed to file an Amended Complaint that shall solely amend the jurisdictional allegations of the original to reflect the information provided in Dkt. No. 166. No other amendments will be permitted. Defendants may have 14 days from filing of the Amended Complaint to answer or otherwise respond to the new jurisdictional allegations. Because the pending motions for summary judgment do not address subject matter jurisdiction, the parties need not re-file the same. Those motions remain pending before the Court and shall be decided in due course. However, because of the recent developments in this case, the trial scheduled for October 26, 2026 is hereby VACATED, with all unexpired deadlines in the Second Amended Rule 16 Scheduling Order held in abeyance pending decision(s) on the parties' motions for summary judgment. Nothing herein shall prevent the parties from contacting the assigned Magistrate Judge for purposes of settlement discussions. See Dkt. No. 160 . IT IS SO ORDERED. (CHIEF JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON)(tyk)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
Phone
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 UK may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.