Quatro v. Tehachapi Unified School District

Filing 26

ORDER re 23 Stipulation filed by Tehachapi Unified School District. The parties shall file the requisite list of additional stipulated facts on or before 1/9/2017. See Order for full details. signed by District Judge Donald W Molloy on 1/5/2017. (Ethridge, D)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARIS QUATRO,

CASE: 1:16–CV–01213–DWM

Plaintiff,
vs.

ORDER

TEHACHAPI UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT,
Defendant.

On December 8, 2016, the parties were ordered to file additional stipulated
facts on or before December 16, 2016. (Doc. 18.) On December 16, 2016, the
plaintiff filed a declaration outlining failed communication between the parties in
lieu of the required stipulated facts with the assurance that the required document
would be filed on December 19. (Doc. 19.) It was not. On December 20, 2016, an
order was issued requiring the defendant to show cause why the plaintiff’s facts, as
were provided in the pretrial statement, should not be adopted by the Court. (Doc.
20.) In response to that order, the defendant requested additional time to provide
stipulated facts. (Doc. 21.) The defendant’s request was granted, and the parties
1

were given until January 2, 2017, to file their additional stipulated facts. (Doc.
22.) On January 2, instead of filing stipulated facts, the defendant filed
“Defendant’s Additional Stipulated [sic] of Facts; Declaration of Kathleen R.
Lamay,” indicating that the plaintiff “would review them the following day.”
(Doc. 23.)
A “stipulation” is defined as “[a] voluntary agreement between opposing
parties concerning some relevant point.” Black’s Law Dict. 1551 (West, 9th ed.
2009). The defendant’s filing of facts that have not been agreed upon—much less
reviewed—by the other party is not a stipulation. The parties have therefore failed
to comply for a second time with this Court’s order. As this is an attorneys’ fees
case, there are underlying facts that cannot be reasonably disputed and no rationale
why the parties are unable to confer to produce a list of those facts. The time and
effort it has taken to produce, as yet unsuccessfully, an undisputed list of facts has
no possible effect except to drive up the cost of this litigation, to the detriment of
defense counsel’s client. The parties and counsel are abdicating their
responsibility under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to help “secure the just,
speedy, and inexpensive determination” of this action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 1; see also
Fed. R. Civ. P. 16.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall file the requisite list of
2

additional stipulated facts on or before January 9, 2017. The failure to do so will
result in this matter being set for hearing and the possible imposition of sanctions.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f)(1)(C).
Dated this 5th day of January, 2017.

3