Washington v. Taser International, Inc.

Filing 89

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 4/2/13 ORDERING the Court hereby orders that the civil actions (Washington) 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD and (Bauer) 06-CV-00549 JAM-DAD are hereby ordered CONSOLIDATED for all purposes per FRCP 42 (a). The earlier filed case, (Washington) 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD, shall be the leading case. The caption on documents filed in the consolidated cases shall be shown as 2:05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD. (Becknal, R)

1

5

JAMES V. FITZGERALD, III (State Bar No. 55632)
NOAH G. BLECHMAN (State Bar No. 197167)
PETRA BRUGGISSER (State Bar No. 241173)
MCNAMARA, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY,
BORGES & AMBACHER LLP
1211 Newell Avenue
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

John C. Burton (State Bar No.
86029)
LAW OFFICES OF JOHN
BURTON
Law 65 North Raymond Avenue,
Suite 300
Pasadena, CA 91103
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile
[phone]

6

Attorneys for Defendants (both cases)

7

ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ (State Bar No. 064578)
CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
A Professional Corporation
California Plaza
2121 North California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

Attorneys for Plaintiff
ANDREW WASHINGTON, JR.,
a minor

2
3

8
9
ATTORNEY S AT LA W
1211 NEWELL AVEN UE, WAL NUT CREEK, CA 94596
TELEPHONE: [phone]

McNA MA RA, N EY, B EA TTY , SLAT TE RY, B ORG ES & A MBA CH ER L LP

4

10
11
12

Attorneys for Plaintiff
ANDREW WASHINGTON, JR., a minor

13

JOHN L. BURRIS, Esq. (State Bar # 69888)
BENJAMIN NISENBAUM, Esq. (State Bar #222173)
LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS
7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120
Oakland, CA 94621
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

14
15
16
17
18

Mark E. Merin (State Bar No.
043849)
LAW OFFICES OF MARK E.
MERIN
1010 F Street, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ANDREW WASHINGTON, JR.,
a minor

Attorneys for Plaintiff
LORI BAUER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

20
21
22
23
24
25

ANDREW WASHINGTON, JR., A
MINOR, INDIVIDUALLY IN HIS
PERSONAL CAPACITY AND AS
SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OF
DECEDENT ANDREW WASHINGTON,
SR., BY AND THROUGH HIS
GUARDIAN AD LITEM, ALEJANDRA
RAYA,

26
27

Plaintiff,
vs.

28
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE
RELATED CASES - 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD AND
06-CV-00549 JAM-DAD

Case No. 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD
STIPULATION AND
ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE
RELATED CASES – FRCP 42

1

TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.; CITY
OF VALLEJO; et al., ,

2
Defendants.
3
4
5

LORI BAUER, INDIVIDUALLY, AND
AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE ESTATE OF ANDREW
WASHINGTON,

Case No. 06-CV-00549 JAM-DAD

6
Plaintiff,
7

9
ATTORNEY S AT LA W
1211 NEWELL AVEN UE, WAL NUT CREEK, CA 94596
TELEPHONE: [phone]

McNA MA RA, N EY, B EA TTY , SLAT TE RY, B ORG ES & A MBA CH ER L LP

vs.
8

10

CITY OF VALLEJO, A MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

11
12
13
14

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties to this action,
through their respective counsel of record, as follows:
WHEREAS this Court issued a Related Case Order for the concurrently pending civil

15

actions (Washington) 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD and (Bauer) 06-CV-00549 JAM-DAD.

The

16

Court reasoned that “the assignment of the matters to the same judge and magistrate judge is

17

likely to affect a substantial savings of judicial effort and is also likely to be convenient for the

18

parties.” (See Related Case Order, signed by Hon. District Court Judge John A. Mendez on

19

March 21, 2013, Document 87 (Washington) and Document 44 (Bauer)).

20

WHEREAS the parties agree and hereby stipulate to consolidate both actions under FRCP

21

42(a) for the purposes of remaining discovery, pretrial and trial, in other words, for all purposes.

22

Good cause for a consolidation of both actions exists because both cases involve the same parties,

23

the same or similar claims, the same death related event, the same witnesses, same or similar

24

experts, the same or similar evidence and the same or similar questions of fact and law, as set

25

forth below. Thus, a consolidation of both cases for remaining discovery, pretrial and trial, in

26

other words, for all purposes, will likely effect a savings of judicial effort and other economics

27

and will avoid unjust and different outcomes related to the same alleged wrongful death incident.

28

WHEREAS both cases involve the same event, the death of Andrew Washington on
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE
2
RELATED CASES - 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD AND
06-CV-00549 JAM-DAD

Defendants in both cases. In addition, City of Vallejo’s Police Officers Tom Liddicoet and David

3

Jackson are named in the Bauer action. The plaintiff in the Washington action is the minor son of

4

the decedent, whereas the plaintiff in the Bauer case is the decedent’s mother. The claims

5

asserted in both cases are similar as they all arise out of the same incident, namely the alleged

6

wrongful death of the decedent arising out of his contact with the City of Vallejo police officers

7

on September 16, 2004. All in all, the trial of these two cases will likely be almost identical,

8

involving the same or similar parties, witnesses, evidence, experts and overlapping claims. As

9
ATTORNEY S AT LA W
1211 NEWELL AVEN UE, WAL NUT CREEK, CA 94596
TELEPHONE: [phone]

September 16, 2004. The City of Vallejo, Jeremie Patzer, and Robert Nichelini are named

2

McNA MA RA, N EY, B EA TTY , SLAT TE RY, B ORG ES & A MBA CH ER L LP

1

such, these two cases should be consolidated for all purposes.

10

WHEREAS consolidating both cases is also warranted to avoid inconsistent orders,

11

judgments and/or trial outcomes. As both cases involve the same questions of fact and law, they

12

should yield the same result.

13

Defendants for the wrongful death of Andrew Washington on September 16, 2004. The factual

14

issues in both cases will be identical. The legal questions in both cases will be practically

15

identical, with some minor differences due to the fact that one Plaintiff is the son of the Decedent

16

and one is the mother. The overlap in factual and legal issues will be substantial, if not identical.

17

Trying both cases in separate trials and/or deciding both cases in relation to separately filed

18

motions for summary judgment would not only entail substantial duplication of labor, but more

19

importantly, there would be a substantial risk of inconsistent orders, judgments and/or trial

20

outcomes. Furthermore, while each plaintiff maintains his or her own personal and separate

21

cause of action, a wrongful death action is generally considered joint, single and indivisible. All

22

heirs should join in a single action (the so called “one action rule”). San Diego Gas & Elec. Co.

23

v. Superior Court (2007) 146 Cal.App.4th 1545, 1551 (emphasis added).

Plaintiffs in both cases claim damages against the Vallejo

24
25
26
27
28

///
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE
RELATED CASES - 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD AND
06-CV-00549 JAM-DAD

3

1
2
3
4

THEREFORE the parties agree and hereby stipulate to consolidate both cases under
FRCP 42(a) for remaining discovery, pretrial and trial purposes, in other words, for all purposes.
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD
DATED: March 28, 2013

5

By: /s/
ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ
JOHN C. BURTON
MARK E. MERIN
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ANDREW WASHINGTON, JR.

6
7
8
9
Dated: March 28, 2013
ATTORNEY S AT LA W
1211 NEWELL AVEN UE, WAL NUT CREEK, CA 94596
TELEPHONE: [phone]

McNA MA RA, N EY, B EA TTY , SLAT TE RY, B ORG ES & A MBA CH ER L LP

CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS

10
11

By: /s/
John L. Burris, Esq.
Benjamin Nisenbaum, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff Lori Bauer

12
13
Dated: March 27, 2013
14

MCNAMARA, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY,
BORGES & AMBACHER LLP

15

By:

16
17

/s/ Noah G. Blechman _______
James V. Fitzgerald, III
Noah G. Blechman
Petra Bruggisser
Attorneys for Defendants (both cases)
ORDER

18
19

Good cause having been shown by the parties, the Court hereby orders that the civil

20

actions (Washington) 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD and (Bauer) 06-CV-00549 JAM-DAD are

21

hereby ordered CONSOLIDATED for all purposes per FRCP 42 (a). The earlier filed case,

22

(Washington) 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD, shall be the leading case. The caption on documents

23

filed in the consolidated cases shall be shown as 2:05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26

Dated: April 2, 2013
/s/ John A. Mendez____________
Honorable John A. Mendez
United States District Court Judge

27
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE
RELATED CASES - 05-CV-00881 JAM-DAD AND
06-CV-00549 JAM-DAD

4