Grismore et al v. City of Bakersfield et al

Filing 60

STIPULATION and ORDER 59 Dismissing Certain Claims with Prejudice, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 9/13/2018. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Michael G. Marderosian, No. 77296
Heather S. Cohen, No. 263093
MARDEROSIAN & COHEN
1260 Fulton Street
Fresno, CA 93721
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Virginia Gennaro, No. 138877
City Attorney
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

10
11

Attorneys for:

12

Defendants CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, OFFICER DANNI MELENDEZ,
OFFICER SANTOS LUEVANO, OFFICER NATHAN POTEETE, OFFICER
RYAN CLARK, and SERGEANT DANIEL McAFEE

13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

TIMOTHY GRISMORE, an individual;
XAVIER HINES, an individual,

17
18

Plaintiffs,
vs.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, a municipality;
OFFICER MELENDEZ, an individual;
OFFICER LUEVANO, an individual;
OFFICER POTEETE, an individual;
OFFICER CLARK, an individual;
OFFICER McAFEE, an individual;
and DOES 1-10, inclusive,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:17-CV-00413-JLT
STIPULATION DISMISSING CERTAIN
CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON
(Doc. 59)

26
27
28

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties hereto, by and through their
respective counsel of record, that the following all claims be dismissed in their entirety, with prejudice:

1

1

STIPULATION

2

The parties have met and conferred multiple times regarding their respective contemplated

3

dispositive motions in this matter. They have arrived at the following stipulation and proposed order, with

4

which they propose to compromise with respect to a number of issues raised. Specifically, the parties

5
6

stipulate that (and request that the Court enter an order confirming that):
1.

Plaintiffs agree to dismiss all claims alleged against Defendant Sergeant Daniel McAfee

with prejudice;
7

2.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Plaintiffs agree to dismiss their third cause of action for violation of the Fourteenth

Amendment Substantive Due Process claim against all Defendants with prejudice;
3.

Plaintiffs agree to dismiss their fourth cause of action for violation Fourteenth Amendment

Equal Protection against Defendants Officer Nathan Poteete and Officer Ryan Clark with prejudice;
4.

Plaintiffs agree to dismiss their fifth cause of action for violation of the First Amendment

Retaliation against Defendants Officer Ryan Clark and Officer Nathan Poteete with prejudice;
5.

Plaintiffs agree to dismiss their seventh, eighth, and ninth causes of action for Municipal

Liability with prejudice; and
6.

Plaintiffs agree to dismiss their tenth cause of action for violation of the Ralph Act against

Defendant Officer Ryan Clark and Nathan Poteete with prejudice;
7.

Plaintiffs agree to dismiss their twelfth cause of action for Battery against Defendant

17

Officer Ryan Clark and Nathan Poteete with prejudice;
18
19
20
21

8.

In return, Defendants agree to forego filing a pre-trial dispositive motion;

9.

There is good cause to approve this stipulation because it will streamline the issues to be

tried and reduce the time and expense associated with dispositive motions.
10.

The parties jointly request that the Court enter an order consistent with this stipulation.

22
23

Dated: September 13, 2018

THE LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS C. SEABAUGH

24

/s/ Thomas C. Seabaugh
By:________________________________
Thomas C. Seabaugh,
Attorneys for Plaintiff

25
26
27
28

Dated: September 13, 2018

ALDERLAW PC

2

1

/s/ Neil Gehlawat

2

By:________________________________
Neil Gehlawat,
Attorneys for Plaintiff

3
4
5
6

Dated: Dated: September 13, 2018

MARDEROSIAN & COHEN

7

/s/ Michael G. Marderosian

8

By:________________________________
Michael G. Marderosian,
Attorneys for Defendants
above-named.

9
10
11
12

PROPOSED ORDER

13
14
15
16

The parties have stipulated to dismiss certain issues in lieu of dispositive motions as a means of
compromise. Good cause appearing, the Court adopts the parties’ stipulation and ORDERS:
1.

The following claims for relief in the Plaintiffs’ Complaint are DISMISSED WITH

PREJUDICE with each side to bear its own fees and costs as to those claims:
17

(1) all claims alleged against Defendant Sergeant Daniel McAfee;
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

(2) Plaintiffs’ third cause of action for violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Substantive Due
Process claim against all Defendants;
(3) Plaintiffs’ fourth cause of action for violation Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection
against Defendants Officer Nathan Poteete and Officer Ryan Clark;
(4) Plaintiffs’ fifth cause of action for violation of the First Amendment Retaliation against
Defendants Officer Ryan Clark and Officer Nathan Poteete;
(5) Plaintiffs’ seventh, eighth, and ninth causes of action for Municipal Liability;
(6) Plaintiffs tenth cause of action for violation of the Ralph Act against Defendant Officer
Ryan Clark and Nathan Poteete; and
(7) Plaintiffs’ twelfth cause of action for Battery against Defendant Officer Ryan Clark and

27

Nathan Poteete;
28

3

1
2

2.

Defendants will forego filing a pre-trial dispositive motion as to the remaining causes of

action.

3
4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 13, 2018

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4