Kim Adams v. County of Kern et al

Filing 44

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 43 Stipulation to Modify Scheduling Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 10/30/2019. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

GERAGOS & GERAGOS
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
LAWYERS
HISTORIC ENGINE CO. NO. 28
644 South Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, California 90017-3411
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile [phone]
[e-mail]

BEN J. MEISELAS
SBN 277412
NOAH GELDBERG
SBN 311722
Attorneys for Plaintiff KIM ADAMS

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KIM ADAMS, an individual,

12

Plaintiff,

13

vs.

14
15
16
17

COUNTY OF KERN;
KERN COUNTY PROBATION
DEPARTMENT;
DAVID M. KUGE, an individual;
REYES SOBERON, JR., and individual; and
DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants.

18
19
20

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

CASE NO. 1:17-cv-00464-JLT
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
STIPULATION TO MODIFY
SCHEDULING ORDER
(Doc. 43)

TO THE HONORABLE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF
RECORD:

21

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff KIM ADAMS, an individual, and Defendants

22

COUNTY OF KERN; KERN COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT; DAVID M. KUGE, an

23

individual; REYES SOBERON, JR., an individual; and DOES 1 through 50 (hereafter

24

collectively the “parties”), by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as

25

follows:

26

WHEREAS, due to the continuance of criminal proceedings against Defendant Reyes

27

Soberon, Jr. and the pendency of Plaintiff’s related case in the California Court of Appeal for the

28

Stipulation & [Proposed] Order to Modify Scheduling Order

1

1

Fifth Appellate District, the parties entered an initial Joint Stipulation to Extend Dates and

2

Deadlines that was approved by the Court on September 13, 2018 (ECF No. 32);

3

WHEREAS, due in part to the fact that Plaintiff’s son, Marcus Anthony Ramirez,

4

sustained a serious gunshot wound that resulted in Plaintiff incurring familial obligations that

5

interfered with her availability for discovery proceedings, the parties entered a second Stipulation

6

to Modify Scheduling Order that was approved by the Court on April 23, 2019 (ECF No. 36);

7

WHEREAS, due to the fact that Plaintiff’s children and caretaker needed to attend to an

8

ill family member out of town and/or were required to attend medical appointments which

9

circumstances interfered with their availability for discovery proceedings and due to the fact that

10

counsel for Defendants County of Kern and David M. Kuge needed to undergo knee surgery, the

11

parties entered a third Stipulation to Modify Scheduling Order that was approved by the Court on

12

June 24, 2019 (ECF No. 38);

13

WHEREAS, due to complications in the knee surgery that counsel for Defendants County

14

of Kern and David M. Kuge underwent, the parties entered a fourth Stipulation to Modify

15

Scheduling Order that was approved by the Court on July 24, 2019 (ECF No. 40);

16

WHEREAS, the parties have continued in good faith to cooperate in scheduling discovery

17

proceedings in this matter and had scheduled depositions of Plaintiff’s sons and caretaker for

18

October 22 and 23, 2019 and a Mental Health Examination of Plaintiff for October 30, 2019;

19

WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s son, Angel Ramirez Adams, who was to be deposed on October

20

23, 2019, sustained a severe leg injury shortly before that date requiring emergency room

21

treatment and subsequent treatment in Los Angeles that has rendered Plaintiff, her sons, and her

22

caretaker unavailable for discovery proceedings until mid-January 2020;

23

WHEREAS, Plaintiff has confirmed her availability for her Mental Health Examination

24

on Saturday, January 11, 2020, and Defendants have confirmed the availability of their examiner

25

on that date;

26
27

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to again extend the dates and deadlines in this matter
as outlined below:

28

Stipulation & [Proposed] Order to Modify Scheduling Order

2

1

Event/Deadline

2

Existing Date

Stipulated New Date

Mental Examination of Plaintiff

October 30, 2019

January 11, 2020

Non-Expert Discovery Deadline

December 2, 2019

January 27, 2020

Expert Witness Disclosure

January 2, 2020

February 27, 2020

Rebuttal Witness Disclosure

February 3, 2020

March 30, 2020

Expert Discovery Deadline

March 4, 2020

April 29, 2020

Non-Dispositive Motion Deadline (Filing)

April 6, 2020

June 1, 2020

3
4
5
6
7
8
Non-Dispositive Motion Deadline (Hearing) May 4, 2020

13

July 20, 2020

September 14, 2020

October 5, 2020

November 30, 2020

Trial

12

August 3, 2020

Pre-Trial Conference

11

June 8, 2020

Dispositive Motion Deadline (Hearing)

10

June 29, 2020

Dispositive Motion Deadline (Filing)

9

November 30, 2020

March 1, 2021

14

WHEREAS, the parties understand that they have already requested modification of the

15

Court’s Scheduling Order multiple times and that such modification places a burden on the Court

16

and all counsel;

17
18

WHEREAS, the parties intend to prevent further continuances by agreeing that the present
request for modification of the Court’s Scheduling Order shall be the last;

19

IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED AND AGREED THAT:

20

1. All dates and deadlines may be continued as outlined by the parties above; and

21

2. The parties shall not request further continuances of the dates and deadlines referred

22

to herein.

23
24

///

25

///

26
27

Respectfully Submitted,

28

DATED: October 29, 2019

WEAKLEY & ARENDT

Stipulation & [Proposed] Order to Modify Scheduling Order

3

1

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

2
/s/ Brande Gustafson (authorized on 10/29/19)
James D. Weakley
Brande L. Gustafson
Attorneys for Defendant, Reyes Soberon, Jr.

3
4
5
DATED: October 29, 2019
6

MARGO A. RAISON,
KERN COUNTY COUNSEL

7
/s/ Kathleen Rivera (authorized on 10/29/29)
Kathleen Rivera, Deputy County Counsel
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Kern
County Probation Department, and David M. Kuge

8
9
10
DATED: October 29, 2019

GERAGOS & GERAGOS, APC

11
/s/ Ben Meiselas
Mark J. Geragos
Ben J. Meiselas
Noah Geldberg
Attorneys for Plaintiff Kim Adams

12
13
14
15

ORDER

16
17
18
19

The parties have stipulated to amend the case schedule. They offer no explanation why
the trial should be continued so far out. Indeed, even with the modifications sought, there is no
need to change the pretrial or trial date. Thus, the Court GRANTS the stipulation IN PART and
ORDERS the case schedule to be amended as follows:

20
21

1.

2.

24
25
26
27

The parties SHALL complete all non-expert discovery no later than January 27,

2020;

22
23

The plaintiff SHALL submit to the mental health examination on January 11,

2020 and expert discovery no later than April 29, 2020. The parties SHALL disclose their
experts no later than February 27, 2020 and their rebuttal experts no later than March 27,
2020;
3.

Non-dipositive motions, if any, SHALL be filed no later than May 22, 2020 and

heard no later than June 19, 2020;

28

Stipulation & [Proposed] Order to Modify Scheduling Order

4

1
2

4.

Dipositive motions, if any, SHALL be filed no later than July 10, 2020 heard no

later than August 20, 2020.

3

No other modifications to the case schedule are authorized and the Court declines to

4

consider any further requests to amend the case schedule absent a showing, supported by

5

admissible evidence, that extraordinary cause exists to do so.

6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

October 30, 2019

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

Stipulation & [Proposed] Order to Modify Scheduling Order

5