Smart v. California Highway Patrol et al

Filing 74

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/31/21 MODIFYING 56 Scheduling Order and setting the following dates: Fact Discovery Cut-off: 7/20/21; Expert Disclosures Deadline: 8/5/21; Supplemental Expert Disclosures Deadline: 8/19/21; Dispositive Motion hearing deadline: 10/14/21. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

MICHAEL J. HADDAD (State Bar No. 189114)
JULIA SHERWIN (State Bar No. 189268)
TERESA ALLEN (State Bar No. 264865)
HADDAD & SHERWIN LLP
505 Seventeenth Street
Oakland, California 94612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
DENISE SMART

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

DENISE SMART, Individually and as
Successor in Interest of Decedent
DANIEL SHAHAM,

13

Plaintiff,

14

vs.

15

CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, a
state agency, CHIEF OF CHP
NORTHERN DIVISION
HEADQUARTERS, SCOTT
GILLINGWATER, in his individual
capacity; CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY
PATROL OFFICER PAUL BRIAN
SHADWELL; and DOES 1 through 10,
individually, jointly and severally,

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No: 2:17-cv-01075-TLN-JDP
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER

24
25
26
27
28
No: 2:17-cv-01075-TLN-JDP: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER

1

All parties, by and through their counsel of record, stipulate and hereby move this court to

2

modify its December 4, 2020, Scheduling Order (Doc. 56) to extend discovery and pretrial

3

deadlines by approximately 3 months. The parties propose the following amended dates and

4

deadlines (or as soon thereafter that the Court is available):

5
6
7
8
9
10

Event

Current date

Proposed Date or Deadline

Fact Discovery Cut-off

April 20, 2021

July 20, 2021

Expert Disclosures Deadline

May 5, 2021

August 5, 2021

Supplemental Expert
Disclosures Deadline
Dispositive Motion hearing
deadline

May 19, 2021

August 19, 2021

July 8, 2021

October 7, 2021

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Good cause exists to grant the requested modification:
1.

This is a civil rights/wrongful death case involving the shooting death of Daniel

Shaham against Defendant Officer Paul Shadwell.
2.

The Parties are currently involved in related discovery disputes concerning Officer

Shadwell’s mental condition and fitness for duty when he fatally shot Daniel Shaham on June 4,
2016. Defendants filed a Motion to Quash certain subpoenas Plaintiff served on multiple entities.
(Doc. 59). Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel Defendants’ discovery responses. (Doc. 65). Judge

20

Peterson held a hearing for both motions on February 25, 2021, but has yet to issue a ruling on

21

either motion. Once these issues are resolved, Plaintiff intends to file a Motion for a Rule 35 exam.

22

Per Judge Peterson’s instruction, Plaintiff has postponed filing the related Rule 35 motion until after

23

the ruling on the pending motions.

24
25
26
27
28

3.

The Parties anticipate that additional time will be needed to resolve these issues

beyond the current deadlines. If the motions are granted, the proposed modifications will provide
the parties the necessary time to take further depositions, if necessary, and for the completion of the
Rule 35 exam without the time constraints under the present scheduling order.
No: 2:17-cv-01075-TLN-JDP: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER

1
2
3
4
5
6

4.

The Parties reasonably believed that their previous stipulation to extend discovery

and pretrial deadlines by approximately 3 months (Doc. 54) would have provided the parties and the
Court sufficient time to address these matters. The parties are confident that all remaining
discovery disputes will be resolved within the proposed modified deadlines.
5.

The parties are mindful of the Court’s limited resources, especially during this

7

pandemic. All counsel will continue to work cooperatively to resolve remaining discovery issues in

8

an orderly fashion and believe that they will complete all necessary discovery with this final three-

9

month extension of discovery deadlines.

10
11

For the foregoing reasons, the Parties respectfully request that this Court enter an order
extending the briefing schedule in this case as set forth above.

12
13

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

14
15

DATED: March 29, 2021

16

/s/ Teresa Allen

17

TERESA ALLEN
Attorneys for Plaintiff

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

HADDAD & SHERWIN LLP

DATED: March 29, 2021

MATTHEW RODRIQUEZ
Acting Attorney General of California
CATHERINE WOODBRIDGE
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
/s/ Amie C. McTavish
AMIE C. MCTAVISH
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendants

26
27
28
No: 2:17-cv-01075-TLN-JDP: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER

1
ORDER

2
3
4
5

Based on the parties’ stipulation, and with good cause appearing therefor,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the previous Scheduling Order entered on December 4,
2020 (Doc. 56) is hereby modified, and that the following dates are set:

6

Event

New Date or Deadline

7

Fact Discovery Cut-off

July 20, 2021

8

Expert Disclosures Deadline

August 5, 2021

9

Supplemental Expert
Disclosures Deadline
Dispositive Motion hearing
deadline

August 19, 2021

10
11

October 14, 2021

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16

Dated: March 31, 2021
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
No: 2:17-cv-01075-TLN-JDP: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER