Tandel v. County of Sacramento, et al.

Filing 52

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 4/19/11 ORDERING the currently scheduled trial date of March 19, 2012 is hereby continued to June 25, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7. An amended Pretrial Scheduling Order will be issued setting forth other applicable deadlines consistent with that continued trial date. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

LONGYEAR, O’DEA & LAVRA, LLP
3620 American River Drive, Suite 230
Sacramento, California 95864-5923
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Van Longyear, CSB No. 84189
Jennifer Marquez, CSB No. 232194
Attorneys for Defendants, County of Sacramento,
Sheriff John McGinness, AnnMarie Boylan,
Tom Smith, M.D., Asa Hambly, M.D., and Hank Carl, R.N.

7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SANDIPKUMAR TANDEL,
Plaintiff,

12
13

vs.

14

CASE NO. 2:09-cv-00842 MCE GGH
STIPULATION AND ORDER
MODIFYING PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING ORDER

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16
17

The undersigned parties, which includes all parties to the above-entitled action, through

18

counsel, hereby STIPULATE and AGREE and jointly respectfully request modification of the

19

Court’s March 18, 2010 Pretrial Scheduling Order, for good cause as discussed herein.

20
21

In its March 18, 2010 Pretrial Scheduling Order, the Court set forth discovery deadlines
as follows:

22

Non-Expert Discovery: completed by May 19, 2011

23

Parties’ designation of expert witnesses: completed by July 18, 2011

24

Parties’ designation of rebuttal expert witnesses: completed by August 18, 2011

25

Deadline for filing dispositive motions: July 14, 2011

26

Final Pretrial Conference: January 26, 2012, 2:00 p.m.

27

Trial: March 19, 2012

28

1

The designation and preparation of expert witnesses requires that Plaintiff’s and Defendants’

2

expert witnesses have access to a complete record of discovery, including the complete

3

depositions of Plaintiff, various custody staff and certain of Plaintiff’s medical providers.

4

Furthermore, Defendants’ experts must perform an independent medical evaluation of Plaintiff,

5

which will provide Defendants experts information for their use in establishing Plaintiff’s

6

disability and future medical and rehabilitation needs.

7

Plaintiff has been diagnosed with Neuromyelitis Optica (NMO), an autoimmune,

8

inflammatory disorder that attacks the optic nerves and spinal cord. When Defendants first

9

attempted to notice Plaintiff’s deposition in November of 2009, Defendants were informed that

10

Plaintiff was too ill to provide testimony at that time. When the scheduling of Plaintiff’s

11

deposition resumed, Defendants were informed that due to Plaintiff’s medical condition,

12

Plaintiff’s deposition must be limited to 1-2 hour sessions. After all parties met and conferred

13

for the first three sessions of Plaintiff’s deposition, Defendants noticed Plaintiff’s deposition for

14

March 23-25, 2010 for an hour to two hours each session. Because Plaintiff was re-incarcerated

15

the day before his scheduled deposition, Plaintiff’s deposition did not go forward.

16

Defendants took the first session of Plaintiff’s deposition on April 14, 2010 and the

17

second session on May 5, 2010. On May 10, 2010, plaintiff suffered a recurrence of NMO and

18

was hospitalized. The third session of Plaintiff’s deposition was completed on September 6,

19

2010. Since April 14, 2010, Defendants have completed four sessions and anticipate one more

20

session to complete Plaintiff’s deposition.

21

During the fourth session of Plaintiff’s deposition on January 31, 2011, when Defendants

22

were making arrangements to complete Plaintiff’s deposition and have Plaintiff scheduled for an

23

independent medical evaluation, Defendants were informed that Plaintiff was leaving the country

24

to seek additional medical treatment in India and would not return to the United States until May

25

26, 2011. As a result, the parties agreed to modify the scheduling order to accommodate

26

Plaintiff’s medical treatment and Defendants’ independent medical evaluation of Plaintiff and

27

subsequent expert work-up of the case.

28
Stipulation and Proposed Order Modifying Pretrial Scheduling Order
Page 2

1
2

The parties hereby request and stipulate that the Court’s March 18, 2010 Pretrial
Scheduling Order be modified as follows:

3

Non-expert Discovery: completed by July 18, 2011

4

Parties’ designation of expert witnesses: completed by September 19, 2011

5

Parties’ designation of rebuttal expert witnesses: completed by October 10, 2011

6

Dispositive Motions

7

Plaintiff’s dispositive motion: filed by 4:00 p.m. on October 27, 2011

8

Defendants’ opposition and cross motion: filed by 4:00 p.m. on November 17,

9

2011

10

Plaintiff’s reply and opposition: filed by 4:00 p.m. on December 22, 2011

11

Defendants’ reply: filed by 4:00 p.m. on January 12, 2012

12

Hearing on Dispositive motions: by 2:00 p.m. on January 19, 2012

13

Joint Final Pretrial Statement: filed by April 12, 2012

14

Trial Brief: filed by April 19, 2012

15

Evidentiary or Procedural Motions: filed by April 26, 2012

16

Opposition: filed by May 10, 2012

17

Reply: filed by May 17, 2012

18

Final Pretrial Conference: on May 24, 2012 at 2:00 p.m.

19

Trial: June 25, 2012

20

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

21

Date: April 6, 2011

22
23
24

LAW OFFICES OF GERI LYNN GREEN, LC
By: /s/ Geri Lynn Green
GERI LYNN GREEN
Attorney for Plaintiff

25
26
27
28
Stipulation and Proposed Order Modifying Pretrial Scheduling Order
Page 3

.

1

Date: April 6, 2011

LONGYEAR, O’DEA & LAVRA, LLP

Date: April 6, 2011

By: /s/ Jennifer Marquez
.
JENNIFER MARQUEZ
Attorney for Defendants County of
Sacramento, Sheriff John McGinness,
AnnMarie Boylan, Tom Smith, M.D., Asa
Hambly, M.D., and Hank Carl, R.N.
PORTER SCOTT

2
3
4
5
6

By: /s/ Norm Prior
NORM PRIOR
Attorney for Defendants
Evalyn Horowitz, MD and
Chris Smith, MD

7
8
9
10
11
12

ORDER

13

Based on the foregoing stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefor, the

14

currently scheduled trial date of March 19, 2012 is hereby continued to June 25, 2012 at

15

9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7. An amended Pretrial Scheduling Order will be issued setting forth

16

other applicable deadlines consistent with that continued trial date.

17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18
19

DATED: April 19, 2011

20
__________________________________
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24

DEAC_Signature-END:

04if0d0-fkhfkh

25
26
27
28
Stipulation and Proposed Order Modifying Pretrial Scheduling Order
Page 4