Doe v. County of Kern et al

Filing 46

STIPULATION and ORDER 45 to Continue Discovery Cut Off Dates, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 8/10/2016. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

THERESA A. GOLDNER, COUNTY COUNSEL
By: KATHLEEN RIVERA (SBN 211606)
MARSHALL S. FONTES, DEPUTY (SBN 139567)
Kern County Administrative Center
1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant County of Kern

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

JANE DOE, an individual,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
vs.
)
)
COUNTY OF KERN, a municipality;
)
GEORGE ANDERSON, an individual; )
and DOES 1-10, inclusive,
)
Defendants.
)
)

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-01641-DAD-JLT
JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
DISCOVERY CUT OFF DATES;
[PROPOSED ORDER]
(Doc. 45)

17

COME NOW, Plaintiff, JANE DOE, and Defendants COUNTY OF KERN and

18

GEORGE ANDERSON, who have met and conferred through their respective attorneys of

19

record, and now make this joint stipulated request of the Court:

20

REPRESENTATIONS AND JOINT STIPULATION AND REQUEST:

21

1.

Pursuant to the Scheduling Order (Doc. No. 25) the deadline for completion of

22

non-expert discovery is August 22, 2016. The parties previously raised and discussed the

23

possibility of a continuance. After meeting and conferring, the parties have agreed to propose

24

to take only six currently scheduled depositions beyond the discovery deadline for the reasons

25

set forth below, with the court’s permission.

26

2.

The parties have been actively engaged in attempting to complete non expert

27

discovery prior to the deadline of August 22, 2016. The parties have exchanged written

28

discovery, and have issued subpoenas for records disclosed through discovery. Plaintiff has

1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Joint Stipulation to Continue Discovery Cut-Off Dates

1

taken the deposition of the defendant, and the parties have noticed 21 depositions to take place

2

prior to August 22nd. In an effort to complete discovery prior to the deadline, the parties are

3

utilizing Saturday August 13th to take the deposition of the Plaintiff. Further, given that there

4

are two attorneys for Plaintiff and two for the Defendants, the parties are double booking

5

depositions.

6

3.

While the parties are clearly trying to complete discovery by the deadline, some

7

unanticipated delays have occurred. One County employee set to be deposed is on maternity

8

leave. One County employee who will be testifying at a Person Most Qualified is scheduled to

9

serve jury duty on the date of her deposition, and another employee who will be testifying as a

10
11

Person Most Qualified is on vacation until after the discovery deadline.
4.

The effort to complete discovery prior to the deadline has been delayed

12

somewhat, due to the continuation of the hearing on the County’s §827 Petition. The hearing

13

was scheduled for August 2nd, 2016. The Defendants had planned to ask the Juvenile Court to

14

expedite the Court’s ruling on the Petition, and to expedite the redaction of such records. The

15

Defendants wished to have Plaintiff’s records for her deposition. All counsel agreed to continue

16

Plaintiff’s deposition date until August 13th, by which time the Defendants anticipated having

17

Plaintiff’s Juvenile court records. However, the Juvenile Court on its own motion vacated the

18

August 2nd date and continued the hearing until August 15th, after the Plaintiff’s deposition.

19

The Defendants submit that good cause exists for the continuation of the discovery deadline, so

20

that the Defendants may obtain Plaintiff’s Juvenile court records to assist them in taking the

21

Plaintiff’s deposition.

22
23

5.

Therefore, Plaintiff and Defendants stipulate that the Court allow certain

depositions to be conducted after the discovery deadline as follows:
Current Date:

24

Proposed New Date:

25

Plaintiff Jane Doe

8/13/2016

9/8/2016

26

County employee Cherice Jones

8/11/2016

9/7/2016

27

County Employee PMQ

28

Kathy Lemon

8/17/2016

9/7/2016

2
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Joint Stipulation to Continue Discovery Cut-Off Dates

1

County Employee PMQ

2

Meesha Elliot

8/17/2016

9/7/2016

3

Donna Jones

8/18/2016

9/6/2016

4

Sharolyn Takata

8/18/2016

9/6/2016

5

The requested continuance is limited to aforementioned depositions and will not impact

6

expert discovery, the settlement conference, pretrial conference or trial dates as originally set

7

forth in the Scheduling Order.

8

Dated: August 10, 2016

CHAIN-COHN-STILES

9
By:

10
11

/ s / Neil K. Gehlawat
Neil K. Gehlawat
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Jane Doe

12
13

Dated: August 10, 2016

LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS C. SEABAUGH

14
By:

15
16

/ s / Thomas C. Seabaugh
Thomas C. Seabaugh,
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Jane Doe

17
18

Dated: August 10, 2016

THERESA A. GOLDNER, COUNTY COUNSEL

19
By:

20
21

/s/ Kathleen Rivera
Kathleen Rivera and Marshall S. Fontes
Attorneys for Defendant, County of Kern

22
23
24
25

Dated: August 10, 2016

WEAKLEY AND ARENDT
By:

/ s / James D. Weakley
James D. Weakley and Leslie M. Dillahunty
Attorneys for Defendant, George Anderson

26
27
28

3
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Joint Stipulation to Continue Discovery Cut-Off Dates

1

DECLARATION OF KATHLEEN RIVERA

2

REGARDING STIPULATION FOR DISCOVERY CONTINUANCE

3
4

1.

I am an attorney with Kern County Counsel’s office, and am attorney of record

5

for the County of Kern in this matter. The statements made in this declaration are true of my

6

own knowledge; if called upon as a witness, I could and would competently testify to them.

7

2.

After meeting and conferring, the parties have agreed to continue four

8

depositions beyond the discovery deadline of August 22, 2016. All sides agree this stipulation

9

does not involve a continuance of any scheduled court hearing or the trial of this matter.

10

3.

The parties have been actively engaged in attempting to complete non expert

11

discovery prior to the deadline of August 22, 2016. The parties have exchanged written

12

discovery, and have issued subpoenas for records disclosed through discovery. Plaintiff has

13

taken the deposition of the defendant, and the parties have noticed 21 depositions to take place

14

prior to August 22nd. In an effort to complete discovery prior to the deadline, the parties are

15

utilizing Saturday August 13th to take the deposition of the Plaintiff. Further, given that there

16

are two attorneys for Plaintiff and two for the Defendants, the parties are double booking

17

depositions.

18

4.

The parties have encountered some discovery delays, such as the unavailability

19

prior to the deadline of two County employees who are being deposed: one is on maternity

20

leave and the other who will be testifying as a Person Most Qualified is on vacation until after

21

the discovery deadline.

22

5.

The parties effort to complete discovery prior to the deadline has been delayed

23

somewhat, due to the continuation of the hearing on the County’s §827 Petition. The hearing

24

was scheduled for August 2nd, 2016. The Defendants had planned to ask the Juvenile Court to

25

expedite the Court’s ruling on the Petition, and to expedite the redaction of such records. The

26

Defendants wished to have Plaintiff’s records for her deposition.

27

continue Plaintiff’s deposition date until August 13th, by which time the Defendants anticipated

28

having Plaintiff’s Juvenile court records. However, the Juvenile Court on its own motion

All counsel agreed to

4
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Joint Stipulation to Continue Discovery Cut-Off Dates

1

vacated the August 2nd date and continued the hearing until August 15th, after the Plaintiff’s

2

deposition.

3
4
5

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this 10th day of August, 2016, at Bakersfield, California.

6
7
8

/s/ Kathleen Rivera
Kathleen Rivera, Declarant

_

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Joint Stipulation to Continue Discovery Cut-Off Dates

1
2
3

[PROPOSED] ORDER
For GOOD CAUSE shown, and based upon the mutual Stipulation of all parties to this
action, the court hereby continues the following deposition dates:

4

Current Date:

Proposed New Date:

5

Plaintiff Jane Doe

8/13/2016

9/8/2016

6

County employee Cherice Jones

8/11/2016

9/7/2016

7

County Employee PMQ

8

Kathy Lemon

8/17/2016

9/7/2016

9

County Employee PMQ

10

Meesha Elliot

8/17/2016

9/7/2016

11

Donna Jones

8/18/2016

9/6/2016

12

Sharolyn Takata

8/18/2016

9/6/2016

13
14
15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 10, 2016

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

6
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Joint Stipulation to Continue Discovery Cut-Off Dates