Sacramento Homeless Union et al v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 99

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 10/21/24 DISMISSING the Defendant County and costs against Plaintiffs are waived. Each side shall bear its own attorney's fees and costs. Defendant County is released from all claims that were raised or could have been raised concerning the allegations in the complaint and any defendants, either past or current. (Licea Chavez, V)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
11
12

SACRAMENTO HOMELESS UNION, a
local of the CALIFORNIA HOMELESS
UNION/STATEWIDE ORGANIZING
COUNCIL, on behalf of itself and those it
represents; BETTY RIOS; DONTA
WILLIAMS; FALISHA SCOTT and all
those similarly situated,

Case No. 2:22-cv-01095-TLN-CSK

NOTICE OF RESOLUTION AND
DISPOSITIONAL ORDER

13
Plaintiff(s),
14
vs.
15
16
17
18

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, a political
subdivision of the State of California; CITY
OF SACRAMENTO, a municipal
corporation; and DOES 1-100,
Defendant(s).

19
Plaintiffs Sacramento Homeless Union, et al. represented by Anthony D. Prince, Esq. and
20
21
22

Andrea M. Henson, Esq., (“Plaintiffs”) and County of Sacramento (“County”) represented by
Assistant County Counsel Janice M. Snyder and City of Sacramento (“City”) represented by
Senior Deputy City Attorney Gökalp Y. Gürer (collectively “Defendants”) met in Courtroom 24

23
on September 23, 2024 for a Settlement Conference. As a result of that conference, the Plaintiffs
24
moved to dismiss Defendant County in exchange for a waiver of costs and a settlement
25
agreement was reached. A settlement agreement with Defendant City was not reached.
26
As agreed upon on September 23, 2024, this Court so orders as to Plaintiffs and
27
Defendant County only:
28
-1NOTICE OF RESOLUTION & DISPOSITIONAL ORDER

1

Defendant County is dismissed and costs against Plaintiffs are waived. Each side shall

2

bear its own attorney's fees and costs. Defendant County is released from all claims that were

3

raised or could have been raised concerning the allegations in the complaint and any defendants,

4

either past or current. Application of Civil Code Section 1592 is waived.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 21, 2024

7
8
9
10

___________________________________
TROY L. NUNLEY
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2NOTICE OF RESOLUTION & DISPOSITIONAL ORDER