Arnold v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 37

STATUS REPORT by County of Sacramento, Sacramento Public Library Authority. (Paul, Jonathan)

1

Rivera&Associates

2

2 18 0 Har var d Str eet, Suite 3 1 0
Sacr amento , Califor nia 95 815

3

Tel: [phone] Fax: 9 1 6 9 2 2 -1 3 0 3

4

J es s e M . R i vera, C S N 84259
J onat han B. P aul , CS N 21 5884
S h anan L. Hewi t t , CS N 200168
Kel ly A. Yokl ey, C S N 192015

5
6
7
8

Attorneys for Defendants,
County of Sacramento and Sacramento Public Library Authority

9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12

CONNIE ARNOLD,

13
14

Plaintiff,
vs.

15
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.
16
Defendant.
17
18
19

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01998-LKK-EFB
UPDATED STATUS REPORT OF
DEFENDANTS COUNTY OF
SACRAMENTO AND SACRAMENTO
PUBLIC LIBRARY AUTHORITY
Scheduling Conference: April 29, 2013
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Location: Courtroom 4
Before: Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton

Defendants County of Sacramento and Sacramento Public Library Authority (hereinafter
“defendants”) hereby submit their updated status report.

20

Summary of Facts

21

Plaintiff Connie Arnold has brought the subject action alleging violation of the

22

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) - Title II, as well as other federal and state claims. Ms.

23

Arnold, who claims to be a person with a mobility disability and requires the use of the a

24

wheelchair, claims to have been denied access at the Sylvan Oaks Public Library and

25

Crosswoods Park in the City of Citrus Heights, within the County of Sacramento. Plaintiff

26

claims that denial of access took place in September 2011 and that she has been deterred from

27

returning to the park and library since that time.

28

///

Updated Status Report of Defendants County of Sacramento and Sacramento Public Library Authority - Page 1

1

Anticipated Discovery

2

On January 11, 2013, the parties undertook a joint inspection of the Crosswoods Park and

3

Sylvan Oaks Public Library prior to formal discovery. Thereafter on April 1, 2013, Plaintiff put

4

forth her demand for injunctive relief to defendants. Said demand is currently under

5

consideration by defendants’ principals and defendants believe that early resolution of this matter

6

may be possible without the need for formal discovery. Defendants would ask that this matter be

7

set for a settlement conference within thirty days of the scheduling conference to avoid otherwise

8

unnecessary discovery. However, in acknowledgment of the Court’s need to set forth a litigation

9

schedule defendants propose the following discovery and scheduling plan:

10

Initial Scheduling Conference:

April 29, 2013

11

30-Day Discovery Stay Until:

May 29, 2013

12

Fact Discovery Cut-off:

November 25, 2013

13

Expert Disclosures:

January 24, 2014

14

Rebuttal Expert Disclosures:

February 24, 2014

15

Expert Discovery Cut-off:

April 24, 2014

16

Last Day to File Dispositive Motions:

June 23, 2014

17

Jury Trial:

October 21, 2014

18

Future Proceedings

19

Defendants are informed and believe that this is a limited disabled access claim for purely

20

injunctive relief. As such, the parties agreed to initially conduct the joint inspection and attempt

21

to resolve the case under the schedule proposed above. Based upon the demand made by

22

plaintiff following the joint inspection, defendants request the assistance of a magistrate judge for

23

an early settlement conference before engaging in formal discovery.

24

Dated: April 15, 2013

Respectfully submitted,

25

RIVERA & ASSOCIATES

26

/s/ Jonathan B. Paul
By:

27
28

JONATHAN B. PAUL
Attorney for County of Sacramento and
Sacramento Public Library Authority

Updated Status Report of Defendants County of Sacramento and Sacramento Public Library Authority - Page 2