McCoy et al v. City of Vallejo et al

Filing 97

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 4/26/2021 DISMISSING Marquita McCoy's State Law Claims brought in her individual capacity. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6

VERONICA A.F. NEBB
City Attorney, State Bar No. 140001
RANDY J. RISNER
Chief Assistant City Attorney, State Bar No. 172552
KATELYN M. KNIGHT
Assistant City Attorney, State Bar No. 264573
CITY OF VALLEJO, City Hall
555 Santa Clara Street
Vallejo, California 94590
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

7
8
9

420 SIERRA COLLEGE DRIVE, SUITE 140 
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945‐5091 

C o l a n t u o n o ,   H i g h s m i t h   &   W h a t l e y,   P C  

10
11
12

MICHAEL G. COLANTUONO, State Bar No. 143551
[e-mail]
ANDREW C. RAWCLIFFE, State Bar No. 259224
[e-mail]
NIKHIL S. DAMLE, State Bar No. 297350
[e-mail]
COLANTUONO, HIGHSMITH & WHATLEY, PC
420 Sierra College Drive, Suite 140
Grass Valley, California 95945-5091
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

13

Attorneys for Defendants
CITY OF VALLEJO, ANDREW BIDOU, GREG NYHOFF,
MARK THOMPSON, BRYAN GLICK, ANTHONY
15 ROMERO-CANO, COLIN EATON, JORDON PATZER,
STEVEN DARDEN, AND KYLE WYLIE
14

16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
19

KORI MCCOY, etc., et al.,

CASE NO.: 2:19-cv-01191-JAM-CKD

20

Plaintiffs,
21

v.
22 CITY OF VALLEJO, etc., et al.,
23

Defendants.
24

STIPULATION AND ORDER ON DISMISSAL
OF MARQUITA MCCOY’S STATE LAW
CLAIMS BROUGHT IN HER INDIVIDUAL
CAPACITY
Complaint Filed:
SAC Filed:
Trial Date:

June 27, 2019
March 26, 2021
August 29, 2022

25
26
27
28

1

Case No. 2:19-cv-01191-JAM-CKD

STIPULATION AND ORDER ON DISMISSAL OF MARQUITA MCCOY’S STATE LAW CLAIMS
256613.1

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiffs Kori McCoy, Marc McCoy, Louis

1
2

McCoy, Shawnmell Mitchell, Marquita McCoy, and Barbara Dorsey (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants

3

City of Vallejo, Andrew Bidou, Greg Nyhoff, Mark Thompson, Bryan Glick, Anthony Romero-

4

Cano, Colin Eaton, Jordon Patzer, Steven Darden, Kyle Wylie and Ryan McMahon (“Defendants”1),

5

referred to collectively as the “Parties,” by and through their designated counsel, that:
WHEREAS, on April 21, 2021, the Parties held a meet and confer in compliance with section

6
7

III of the Order re Filing Requirements, ECF No. 4-2, in anticipation of Defendants moving under

8

Rule 12(b) to dismiss various causes of action pleaded in Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint’s

9

(“SAC”) for their failure to state a claim.
WHEREAS, the Parties agreed during that meet and confer that Plaintiff Marquita McCoy

420 SIERRA COLLEGE DRIVE, SUITE 140 
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945‐5091 

C o l a n t u o n o ,   H i g h s m i t h   &   W h a t l e y,   P C  

10
11

cannot pursue state law claims brought in her individual capacity for money or damages for failure

12

present a timely government claim for damage within six months of the Willie McCoy’s death and

13

the limitations period has lapsed. Cal. Gov. Code, §§ 905, 905.2, 954.4. Nor can Ms. McCoy rely on

14

her siblings’ claims as their injuries are distinct from hers. Nguyen v. Los Angeles County

15

Harbor/UCLA Medical Center, 8 Cal.App.4th 729, 733–734 (1992); e.g., Castaneda v. Department

16

of Corrections & Rehabilitation, 212 Cal.App.4th 1051, 1063 (2013).
WHEREAS, the Parties agreed that Plaintiff Marquita McCoy would voluntarily dismiss

17
18

with prejudice her state law claims for wrongful death, under the Bane Act (Cal. Civ. Code, § 52.1),

19

battery, conspiracy, and supervisory liability that are found in the SAC’s Fourth through Eighth

20

Causes Action and will not further pursue these or any other state law claim for money or damages

21

on her own behalf, except those sought as a successor-interest to decedent Willie McCoy.
NOW THEREFORE, the Parties, through their undersigned counsel below, hereby stipulate

22
23

and agree:
1. Plaintiff Marquita McCoy’s state law claims for wrongful death, Bane Act violations (Cal.

24
25

Civ. Code, § 52.1), battery, conspiracy, and supervisory liability, which are brought in her

26

individual capacity, under the Fourth through Eighth Cause of Action in Plaintiffs’ Second

27

Amended Complaint are dismissed with prejudice.

28
1

Defendant Ryan McMahon is represented separately by the law firm Angelo, Killday and Kilduff.
2
Case No. 2:19-cv-01191-JAM-CKD
STIPULATION AND ORDER ON DISMISSAL OF MARQUITA MCCOY’S STATE LAW CLAIMS

256613.1

1
2

DATED: April 23, 2021

3

/s/ Andrew C. Rawcliffe
ANDREW C. RAWCLIFFE
Attorneys for Defendants
City of Vallejo, Andrew Bidou, Greg Nyhoff,
Mark Thompson, Bryan Glick, Anthony
Romero-Cano, Colin Eaton, Jordon Patzer,
Steven Darden, and Kyle Wylie

4
5
6
7
8
9

DATED: April 23, 2021

420 SIERRA COLLEGE DRIVE, SUITE 140 
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945‐5091 

C o l a n t u o n o ,   H i g h s m i t h   &   W h a t l e y,   P C  

10

/s/ Derick E. Konz
DERICK E. KONZ
Attorneys for Defendant Ryan McMahon

11
12
13
14

DATED: April 23, 2021

15

/s/ Patrick M. Buelna
PATRICK M. BUELNA
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

16
17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21
22
23

DATED: April 26, 2021

/s/ John A. Mendez
THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

3

Case No. 2:19-cv-01191-JAM-CKD

STIPULATION AND ORDER ON DISMISSAL OF MARQUITA MCCOY’S STATE LAW CLAIMS
256613.1