Rhodes v. Placer County et al

Filing 148

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/1/2011 ORDERING that the 134 Order to Show Cause is DISCHARGED. (Duong, D)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KATHLYN A. RHODES, 11 Plaintiff, 2:09-cv-0489-MCE-KJN-PS 12 v. 13 PLACER COUNTY, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 ORDER / 16 This matter came on for a status (pretrial scheduling) conference on May 19, 17 2011. Plaintiff Kathlyn Rhodes (“plaintiff”) is a licensed attorney bringing this action on her 18 own behalf.1 Plaintiff attended the status conference, but did not participate in the creation of 19 defendants’ status report and did not file a written status report until one day before the 20 conference. Plaintiff had approximately five weeks’ notice of the status conference. (Dkt. No. 21 123 (Order entered April 5, 2011, setting matter for status conference on May 19, 2011).) 22 During the status conference, plaintiff informed the court that extenuating 23 circumstances prevented her from participating in the creation of a joint status report and also 24 25 26 1 This action proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and was reassigned by an order entered February 9, 2010. (Dkt. No. 36.) 1 1 prevented her from filing her individual status report prior to one day before the conference. The 2 undersigned ordered plaintiff to file a written statement under penalty of perjury detailing the 3 circumstances preventing her from filing a status report earlier than one day before the 4 conference, and showing cause why she should not be sanctioned. (Dkt. No. 134.) The 5 undersigned also ordered plaintiff to show cause why the court should accept her delayed status 6 report. (Id.) 7 On May 26, 2011, plaintiff timely filed a written statement in substantial 8 compliance with the court’s order to show cause, which sufficiently described the events 9 contributing to her delayed filing: a medical emergency combined with plaintiff’s decision to use 10 a shared post office box to receive her mail. (Dkt. No. 146.) While plaintiff’s written statement 11 did not expressly include the words “under penalty of perjury” as the court had directed, the court 12 accepts plaintiff’s representations as truthful and in accordance with plaintiff’s ethical duties and 13 duty of candor as an attorney and officer of the court. 14 The undersigned also reminds plaintiff of her obligation to timely prosecute her 15 case. This may require plaintiff to increase the frequency of her visits to the post office box she 16 describes so as to timely receive notifications regarding this case, or perhaps to change her 17 address of record altogether. 18 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 19 1. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 The Order to Show Cause (Dkt. No. 134) is discharged. DATED: June 1, 2011 22 23 24 _____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?