Fagan v. County of Sacramento
Filing
43
AMENDED STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 4/13/17. Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file the Third Amended Complaint, which is to be filed with the Court within ten (10) days of this signed Order.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
1
4
GREGORY M. FINCH (SBN 091237)
SIGNATURE LAW GROUP, LLP
3400 Bradshaw Rd., Suite A-4A
Sacramento, California 95827
Telephone: (916) 856-5800
Facsimile: (916) 880-5255
gfinch@signaturelawgroup.com
5
Attorney for Plaintiff JORDAN FAGAN
2
3
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
11
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
15
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
JORDAN FAGAN
vs.
AIMEE EAGLETON, MICHAEL
MATRANGA, JOHN DOE; and DOES 1
through 20, inclusive,
16
Defendants.
17
Case No. 2:15-cv-01755-JAM-KJN
AMENDED STIPULATION AND ORDER
GRANTING LEAVE FOR PLAINTIFF
TO FILE THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT
Action Filed: August 18, 2015
18
Plaintiff, JORDAN FAGAN (“Plaintiff”) by and through GREGORY M. FINCH of
19
Signature Law Group, LLP, his attorney of record; defendant AIMEE EAGLETON by and
20
through WENDY MOTOOKA of Cregger & Chalfant, LLP, her attorneys of record; and
21
22
23
MICHAEL MATRANGA by and through JONATHAN B. PAUL of Rivera & Associates, his
attorneys of record, submit the following Joint Stipulation and request that the Court grant
24
Plaintiff leave to file a Amended Complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil
25
Procedure:
26
1.
Plaintiff filed his complaint on August 18, 2015.
27
28
1
AMENDED STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING LEAVE FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT
1
2. Following the Court’s granting of Defendant’s County of Sacramento Motion to Dismiss,
2
Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint on January 13, 2016.
3
3.
Following the Court’s granting of Defendant’s County of Sacramento second Motion to
4
5
6
7
8
Dismiss, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint on June 21, 2016.
4. Defendant AIMEE EAGLETON filed her answer to the Second Amended Complaint on
July 26, 2016.
5. Defendant MICHAEL MATRANGA filed his answer to the Second Amended Complaint
9
on July 27, 2016.
10
11
12
13
14
15
6. While in the course of discovery, Plaintiff has determined that Defendant AIMEE
EAGLETON appears not be responsible for the injuries suffered by Plaintiff.
7. Plaintiff seeks to amend his Complaint by dismissing Defendant AIMEE EAGLETON
and limit all causes of action to Defendant MICHAEL MATRANGA. A Third Amended
Complaint that includes this amendment is attached as Exhibit A.
16
17
8. The parties have met and conferred regarding the elimination of AIMEE EAGLETON as
18
a defendant in Plaintiff’s proposed Third Amended Complaint and Defendants have
19
agreed to Plaintiff’s request for this stipulation.
20
21
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and request that the Court grant Plaintiff
leave to file a Third Amended Complaint in this action, a true and correct copy of which is
22
23
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
24
25
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
26
27
28
2
AMENDED STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING LEAVE FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
Dated: April 12, 2017
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
SIGNATURE LAW GROUP, LLP
5
6
BY:
7
8
/s/ Gregory M. Finch
GREGORY M. FINCH
Attorney for Plaintiff,
JORDAN FAGAN
9
10
Dated: April 12, 2017
CREGGER & CHALFANT LLP
11
BY:
12
13
14
15
Dated: April 12, 2017
/s/ Wendy Motooka ______
WENDY MOTOOKA
Attorney for Defendant
AIMEE EAGLETON
RIVERA & ASSOCIATES
16
17
BY:
18
19
/s/ Jonathan B. Paul
JONATHAN B. PAUL
Attorney for Defendant
MICHAEL MATRANGA
20
ORDER
21
22
23
24
Good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted leave to file the Third
Amended Complaint, which is to be filed with the Court within ten (10) days of this signed
Order.
25
27
/s/ John A. Mendez________________________
HON. JOHN A. MENDEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
28
3
26
Dated: 4/13/2017
AMENDED STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING LEAVE FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT
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?