Hardesty et al v. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District et al

Filing 753

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 11/14/23 DISMISSING action with prejudice as to all defendants and in its entirety, with each Party to bear his own attorneys' fees and costs. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 GLENN W. PETERSON, ESQ. (SBN: 126173) gpeterson@petersonwatts.com PETERSON WATTS LAW GROUP, LLP 2267 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 210 Roseville, California 95661 Telephone: (916) 780-8222 RICHARD M. ROSS, ESQ. (SBN: 59943) richross@calcounsel.com LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD M. ROSS 8081 North Forbes Road Lincoln, California 95648 Telephone: (916) 716-1907 Attorneys for Plaintiffs .Y L. SCHNEIDER, SUSAN J. SCHNEIDER, JAKE J. SCHNEIDER, LELAND A. SCHNEIDER, KATHERINE A. SCHNEIDER, LELAND H. SCHNEIDER, and JARED T. SCHNEIDER DEREK COLE, Bar No. 204250 dcole@colehuber.com COLE HUBER LLP 2281 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 300 Roseville, CA 95661 Telephone: (916) 780-9009 Co-Counsel for Defendant SACRAMENTO COUNTY 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SACRAMENTO DIVISION 17 18 19 20 21 CASE NO. 2:10-cv-02414-KJM-KJN JAY L. SCHNEIDER, ET AL., STIPULATION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, ET AL., Judge: Dept: Defendant(s). Hon. Kimberly J. Mueller 3 22 23 STIPULATION 24 WHEREAS, a jury found the County liable for violating Plaintiffs’ procedural 25 and substantive due process rights and awarded damages, and the County filed 26 motions for judgment after trial and new trial, which District Judge Kimberly J. 27 Mueller denied by order dated March 31, 2018. 28 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER Page 1 1 WHEREAS, the County appealed the jury's verdict to the United States Court 2 of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit, by memorandum opinion dated 3 August 19, 2020, upheld the jury’s finding of liability for violation of due process 4 as to the County. The Court affirmed the jury’s finding that the County acted 5 arbitrarily and unreasonably to deprive the Schneiders of their constitutional rights. 6 However, the Ninth Circuit reversed liability as to the individual Defendants on 7 grounds of immunity and reversed and remanded damages to the District Court as 8 the jury’s award of damages was excessive. 9 WHEREAS, the Court had previously set this case for a second jury trial on 10 October 11, 2023 limited to determining the amount of damages caused to the 11 Plaintiffs by the County’s actions. 12 WHEREAS, prior to said trial date, the Parties hereto reached and entered 13 into a Settlement Agreement, which this Court has affirmed and ordered its 14 enforcement 15 WHEREAS, on October 6, 2023, the Court (ECF 746 Hardesty) ordered 16 enforcement of the settlement agreement made by the Parties and for the County to 17 make payment to Plaintiffs by October 26, 2023. Payment having been received the 18 settlement agreement requires Plaintiffs to dismiss the action with prejudice which 19 is requested by this pleading. 20 WHEREAS, Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 21 provides that a Plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss an action without a court order 22 by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. 23 WHEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate that this action be dismissed with 24 prejudice as to all Defendants and in its entirety, with each Party to bear his own 25 attorneys’ fees and costs, and that the Court may enter the following order upon this 26 stipulation. 27 28 /// /// STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER Page 2 1 2 SO STIPULATED. Dated: November 7, 2023 3 COLE HUBER LLP By: 4 5 Attorney for Defendant SACRAMENTO COUNTY 6 7 Dated: November 7, 2023 8 PETERSON WATTS LAW GROUP, LLP By: 9 /s/ Glenn W. Peterson Glenn W. Peterson, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiffs THE SCHNEIDER FAMILY 10 11 /s/ Derek P. Cole Derek P. Cole, Esq. Dated: November 7, 2023 LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD M. ROSS 12 By: 13 14 /s/ Richard Ross Richard Ross, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiffs THE SCHNEIDER FAMILY 15 16 ORDER 17 Pursuant to the above stipulation, and for good cause appearing therefore, it 18 is hereby ordered that the above action shall be dismissed with prejudice as to all 19 Defendants and in its entirety, with each Party to bear his own attorneys’ fees and 20 costs. 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: November 14, 2023. 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AND ORDER Page 3

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?