Singh, et al v. Sacramento County, et al

Filing 54

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 4/15/11 ORDERING that the Pretrial Scheduling Order is MODIFIED as follows: The Non-Expert Discovery cutt-off date is CONTINUED to 8/29/2011. The Expert Witness Disclosure date is CONTINUE D to 10/28/2011. The Supplemental witness disclosure cut-off date is CONTINUED to 11/21/11. The Expert Discovery cut-off date is CONTINUED to 1/26/2012. Dispositive Motion cut-off date is CONTINUED to 3/23/2012. The Joint Pretrial Statement due by 5/25/12. The Final Pretrial Conference is CONTINUED to 6/1/2012 01:30 PM. The Trial is CONTINUED to 8/14/2012 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 2 (FCD) before Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5

LAW OFFICE OF STEWART KATZ
Stewart Katz, SBN 127425
Guy Danilowitz, SBN 257733
555 University Avenue, Suite 270
Sacramento, CA 95825
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH C. GEORGE
Joseph C. George, Sr., SBN 119231
Joseph George, Jr., SBN 200999
2431 Capitol Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95816
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

LONGYEAR, O’DEA & LAVRA, LLP
Van Longyear, SBN 84189
Jennifer Marquez, SBN 232194
3620 American River Drive, Suite 230
Sacramento, CA 95864
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants,
County of Sacramento, John McGinness,
Scott Jones, Jamie Lewis, AnnMarie Boylan

MORENO & RIVERA
Jesse M. Rivera, SBN 084259
Jonathan B. Paul, SBN 215884
1451 River Park Drive, Suite 145
Sacramento, CA 95815
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant,
Peter Dietrich

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

WILKE, FLEURY, HOFFELT, GOULD
& BIRNEY, LLP
Robert F. Tyler, SBN 063055
400 Capitol Mall, 22nd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants,
Robert Hales, Paul Hendricks, Gregory
Sokolov, and Dr. L. Michael Tompkins
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Estate of BALJIT SINGH, et al.

NO. 2:09-cv-01439-FCD-JFM

Plaintiffs,
vs.
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,

STIPULATION AND ORDER
MODIFYING PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING ORDER

Defendants.
___________________________________/

STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING
PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

1

1

COME NOW THE PARTIES by and through their respective parties and subject to

2

the approval of this Court, hereby stipulate and respectfully request the following

3

modifications and/or amendments to this Court’s Pretrial Scheduling Order of August 31,

4

2010, regarding the scheduling of this case:

5

•

6
7

to August 29, 2011.
•

8
9

•

•

•

•

That the Joint Pretrial Statement currently due March 16, 2012 be moved to May
25, 2012.

•

18
19

That the Dispositive Motion cut-off date currently set for January 27, 2012 be
moved to March 23, 2012.

16
17

That the expert discovery cut-off date currently set for October 13, 2011 be moved
to January 26, 2012.

14
15

That the supplemental expert witness disclosure cut-off date currently set for
August 8, 2011 be moved to November 21, 2011.

12
13

That the expert witness disclosure cut-off date currently set for July 15, 2011 be
moved to October 28, 2011.

10
11

That the non-expert discovery cut-off date currently set for May 16, 2011 be moved

That the Final Pretrial Conference currently set for March 23, 2012 at 2:00pm in
Courtroom 2 be moved to June 1, 2012, at 1:30 p.m.

•

That the Trial currently set for June 5, 2012 9:00am in Courtroom 2 be moved to

20

August 14, 2012, at 9:00 a.m.

21

This calendaring modification is requested because the availability of lead counsel

22

for one of the parties has been affected by the recent death of his mother, as well as the

23

voluminous nature of the relevant records and the breadth of discovery.

24

In addition, there has been an unexpected roadblock to discovery posed by the

25

Sacramento Superior Court requiring multiple motions, despite the cooperation amongst all

26

of the counsel in this matter, to disclose information which potentially has a significant

27

impact on the value of the case.

28

STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING
PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

2

1

Dated: April 14, 2011

2

LAW OFFICE OF STEWART KATZ
/s/ Stewart Katz
STEWART KATZ,
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

3
4
5
6
7

Dated: April 14, 2011

LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH C. GEORGE
/s/ Joseph C. George, Sr.
JOSEPH C. GEORGE, SR.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

8
9
10
11

Dated: April 14, 2011

LONGYEAR, O’DEA & LAVRA, LLP

12
/s/ Van Longyear
VAN LONGYEAR
Attorneys for Defendants,
County of Sacramento, John McGinness,
Scott Jones, Jamie Lewis, AnnMarie Boylan

13
14
15
16
17

Dated: April 14, 2011

MORENO & RIVERA

18
/s/ Jesse M. Rivera
JESSE M. RIVERA
Attorneys for Defendant,
Peter Dietrich

19
20
21
22
23

Dated: April 14, 2011

WILKE, FLEURY, HOFFELT, GOULD &
BIRNEY, LLP

24
25
26
27

/s/ Robert F. Tyler, Jr.
ROBERT F. TYLER, JR.
Attorneys for Defendants, Robert Hales,
Paul Hendricks, Gregory Sokolov, and
L. Michael Tompkins

28

STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING
PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

3

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

2
3
4

Dated: April 15, 2011

_______________________________________
FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING
PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

4