Arnold v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 38

STATUS REPORT by Sunrise Recreation & Park District. (Larsen, Dirk)

1
2
3
4
5
6

MARK F. HAZELWOOD, SBN 136521
DIRK D. LARSEN, SBN 246028
LOW, BALL & LYNCH
505 Montgomery Street, 7th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CONNIE ARNOLD,
Plaintiff,

12
vs.

13
14
15

Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO; SUNRISE
RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT; and
DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants.

16

DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION &
PARK DISTRICT’S STATUS REPORT
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING
CONFERENCE)
Date:
Time:
Location:

April 29, 2013
10:00 a.m.
Courtroom 4 - Honorable
Lawrence K. Karlton

17
18

A.

19

Defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District is represented by Mark F. Hazelwood and Dirk

20

Parties/Counsel

Larsen of Low, Ball & Lynch.

21

B.

22

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

Summary of Facts

23

Disabilities Act (ADA) - Title II, as well as other federal and state claims. Ms. Arnold, who claims to

24

be a person with a mobility disability and requires the use of the a wheelchair, claims to have been

25

denied access at the Sylvan Oaks Public Library and Crosswoods Park in the City of Citrus Heights,

26

within the County of Sacramento. Plaintiff claims that denial of access took place in September 2011,

27

and that she has been deterred from returning to the park and library since that time.

28

///
-1DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT’S STATUS REPORT
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE)
J:\1143\sf0010\Pld\Status Report-003.docx

Case No: 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB

1

C.

2

Defendant understands that all parties have been served.

3

D.

4

Defendant does not expect a joinder of additional parties.

5

E.

6

Plaintiff has filed a first amended complaint. Defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District has

7

Service of Process

Joinder of Additional Party

Amendment of Pleadings

filed an amended answer.

8

F.

9

Plaintiff contends that the court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 USC Section

10

1331, to hear and determine plaintiff’s ADA and Section 504 claims of the Rehabilitation Action of

11

1973. Plaintiff further contends the court has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 USC Section

12

1367 to hear and determine plaintiff’s state law claims, because they are related to plaintiff’s federal

13

claims and arise out of a common nucleus of operative facts. Plaintiff alleges that venue is proper

14

pursuant to 28 USC Section 1391(b), because the real property which is the subject of this action

15

(Sylvan Oaks Public Library and Crosswoods Park) are located in the Eastern District.

Statutory basis for jurisdiction and venue.

16

G.

17

Defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District does not anticipate filing motions at this time.

18

H.

19

Plaintiff’s counsel and counsel for defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District have met and

20

conferred on the issue of discovery. The parties conducted a joint inspection of Crosswoods Park and

21

Sylvan Oaks Public Library on January 11, 2013. Based on that inspection, plaintiff provided this

22

defendant with a demand for injunctive relief on April 1, 2013. Defendant and its counsel are currently

23

in the process of reviewing this demand. At this point, defendant believes that early resolution of this

24

matter may be possible without the need for formal discovery. Accordingly, defendant respectfully

25

requests the assistance of a magistrate judge for a settlement conference to take place before the parties

26

engage in formal discovery.

Anticipated Motions and the Scheduling Thereof

Anticipated Discovery

27

I.

28

Defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District is informed and believes that this is a limited

Future Proceedings

-2DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT’S STATUS REPORT
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE)
J:\1143\sf0010\Pld\Status Report-003.docx

Case No: 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB

1

disabled access claim. As such, following the January 11, 2013 joint inspection, the parties should

2

attempt to resolve the case.

3

The parties have agreed to the following discovery and scheduling plan:

4

Initial Scheduling Conference:

December 10, 2012

5

120 - Day Discovery Stay Until:

April 9, 2013

6

Fact Discovery Cut-Off:

October 9, 2013

7

Expert Disclosures:

December 9, 2013

8

Rebuttal Expert Disclosures:

January 9, 2014

9

Expert Discovery Cut-Off

March 10, 2014

10

Last Day to File Dispositive Motions:

May 12, 2014

11

Jury Trial:

September 15, 2014

12

J.

13

None.

14

K.

15

Defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District has timely demanded a trial by jury.

16

L.

17

5-7 days.

18

M.

19

None anticipated at this time.

20

N.

21

None anticipated at this time.

22

O.

23

Defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District is amendable to using the voluntary dispute

Special Procedures

Demand Jury Trial

Estimate of Trial Time

Modification of Standard Pre-Trial Procedures

Relation to Other Case(s)

Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program

24

resolution program and/or submitting the matter to an early settlement conference, after the joint

25

inspection, with a magistrate judge.

26

P.

27

None at this time.

28

Other Issues

///
-3DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT’S STATUS REPORT
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE)
J:\1143\sf0010\Pld\Status Report-003.docx

Case No: 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB

1
2

Defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District hereby requests that its counsel, which are located
in San Francisco, be permitted to appear for the pre-trial scheduling conference by telephone.

3
4

Dated: April 19, 2013
LOW, BALL & LYNCH

5
6
By

7
8
9

s/ Dirk D. Larsen
MARK F. HAZELWOOD
DIRK D. LARSEN
Attorneys for Defendant
SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT’S STATUS REPORT
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE)
J:\1143\sf0010\Pld\Status Report-003.docx

Case No: 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB