Prison Legal News v. Jones et al

Filing 68

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 11/19/2020 VACATING 60 Consent Decree. The Court's jurisdiction over this matter is hereby TERMINATED, and this case is DISMISSED in its entirety. (Huang, H)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LONGYEAR & LAVRA, LLP John A. Lavra, CSB No.: 114533 Amanda L. McDermott, CSB No.: 253651 3620 American River Drive, Suite 230 Sacramento, CA 95864 Phone: 916-974-8500 Facsimile: 916-974-8510 Attorneys for County of Sacramento, Sheriff Scott Jones ROSEN BIEN GALVAN & GRUNFELD, LLP Ernest Galvan, CSB No.: 196065 101 Mission Street, Sixth Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: (415) 433-6830 Fax: (415) 433-7104 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Case No.: 2:11-cv-00907-JAM-DAD PRISON LEGAL NEWS, a project of the HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENSE CENTER, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SCOTT R. ) JONES, individually and in his capacity as ) Sheriff of the County of Sacramento; DOES 1- ) 20, in their individual and official capacities, ) ) Defendants. ) ) STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE CONSENT DECREE [Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)] 21 22 This Stipulation and Order Vacating the Consent Decree is entered into by and among 23 Plaintiff Prison Legal News, a project of the Human Rights Defense Center, (“Plaintiff”) and 24 Defendants County of Sacramento and Scott R. Jones (“Defendants”) (collectively, “the 25 Parties”), by and through their respective counsel. 26 27 28 WHEREAS, the Parties negotiated a settlement by Consent Decree that was entered on July 16, 2012, resolving all claims asserted in the Complaint [Dkt. No. 60]; WHEREAS, on August 6, 2012 the claims against Defendants were dismissed with 1 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE CONSENT DECREE [Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)] 1 prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), subject to the condition that the Court retained 2 jurisdiction to enforce compliance with the Consent Decree until such jurisdiction is terminated 3 by the Court upon motion of either party [Dkt. No. 62]; 4 WHEREAS, Defendants have complied with the terms of the Consent Decree and have 5 affirmed that they do not intend to modify or cease the current practice at its jail facilities of 6 removing staples and/or mailing labels from publications, correspondence, and documents sent 7 by Publishers to prisoners prior to their delivery to the prisoner [See Exhibit 1 attached hereto]; 8 9 10 WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred and agree that that it would be in the interests of justice and judicial economy and that good cause exists to vacate the Consent Decree at this time. 11 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED that there is good cause to 12 ORDER that the Consent Decree entered in this matter be VACATED, the Court’s jurisdiction 13 thereover be terminated, and the case be dismissed in its entirety. 14 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 15 16 Dated: November 19, 2020 17 LONGYEAR & LAVRA, LLP By: /S/ Amanda L. McDermott JOHN A. LAVRA AMANDA L. MCDERMOTT Attorneys for Defendants County of Sacramento, Sheriff Scott Jones 18 19 20 21 Dated: November 18, 2020 ROSEN BIEN GALVAN & GRUNFELD, LLP 22 23 24 By: /S/ Ernest Galvan ERNEST GALVAN Attorneys for Plaintiff Prison Legal News 25 26 27 28 2 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE CONSENT DECREE [Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)] 1 ORDER 2 Upon review and consideration of the Parties’ stipulation and supporting materials 3 submitted therewith, it is hereby ORDERED that the Consent Decree entered on July 16, 2012 in 4 this matter is VACATED, the Court’s jurisdiction over this matter is hereby terminated, and this 5 case is dismissed in its entirety. 6 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED. 7 8 9 Dated: November 19, 2020 /s/ John A. Mendez THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE CONSENT DECREE [Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)]

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?