County of San Mateo v. State Board of Equalization et al

Filing 61

ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice. Signed by Judge Illston on 3/20/09. (ts, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2009)

Case 3:06-cv-03761-SI

Document 60

Filed 03/19/2009

Page 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

James F. Basile (SBN 228965) [e-mail] KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 555 California Street San Francisco, CA 94104-1501 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 415 439-1500 Attorneys for Defendants and Respondents UNITED AIRLINES and UNITED AVIATION FUELS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, Plaintiff and Petitioner, v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION; CITY OF OAKLAND; UNITED AIRLINES; UNITED AVIATION FUELS; and DOES 1-20, Defendants and Respondents. STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Case No. C 06-3761 SI

Judge:

Hon. Susan Illston

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff County of San Mateo ("Plaintiff" or "County") and Defendants United Airlines and United Aviation Fuels (collectively "United") by and through their designated counsel that the above-captioned action be and is hereby dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1) as follows: WHEREAS, on February 3, 2009 the Superior Court of California for the County of San Francisco issued a judgment in County of San Mateo v. State Board of Equalization, et al., No. 07-459514 (the "State Court Litigation"), dismissing that case, based on a failure to exhaust administrative remedies, without prejudice to the County refiling that case when the State Board of Equalization completes the administrative review triggered by the County's submission of a BOE-549 form; and
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL CASE NO. C 06-3761 SI

Case 3:06-cv-03761-SI

Document 60

Filed 03/19/2009

Page 2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WHEREAS, the County intends to appeal that ruling; and WHEREAS, if the appeal is unsuccessful, the County intends to refile a state court action after the administrative review is completed; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AND STIPULATE that the abovecaptioned action is dismissed without prejudice on the following terms: 1. Plaintiff County shall not refile this action (Case. No. C 06-3761 SI)

against United in any forum, state or federal, or bring any claim related to the subject of the litigation until the later of: A. If the County's appeal of the existing judgment in the State Court

Litigation is successful, sixty (60) days after a final judgment on the merits determining the validity of Regulation 1699(h) in the State Court Litigation. Or, in the event of an appeal of that subsequent judgment, sixty (60) days after the completion of any subsequent appellate proceedings; or B. If the County chooses not to appeal the existing judgment in the

State Court Litigation or the appeal is unsuccessful, sixty (60) days after a final judgment on the merits determining the validity of Regulation 1699(h) in any subsequent suit filed by the County against the State Board of Equalization. Or, in the event of an appeal of the final judgment on the merits in that subsequent action, sixty (60) days after the completion of any subsequent appellate proceedings. 2. Furthermore, the statutes of limitations for all claims brought by Plaintiff in

this action are tolled from May 16, 2006 until the later date of sub-paragraph A or B of paragraph 1 above. 3. Each party shall bear its own attorney's fees and costs incurred in the

prosecution and defense of this action, as well as the negotiations relating to this stipulation. 4. Plaintiff will give United thirty (30) days advance notice before bringing

any claim in any forum against United.

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL

-2-

CASE NO. C 06-3761 SI

Case 3:06-cv-03761-SI

Document 60

Filed 03/19/2009

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6

Dated: March 19, 2009

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP

By: /s/ James F. Basile James F. Basile Attorneys for Defendants and Respondents UNITED AIRLINES and UNITED AVIATION FUELS Dated: March 19, 2009 MICHAEL P. MURPHY, COUNTY COUNSEL

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL

By: /s/ David A. Silberman David A. Silberman, Deputy Attorneys for Plaintiff and Petitioner COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Pursuant To Stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court hereby ORDERS Case No. C 06-3761 SI Dismissed without Prejudice.

Dated: _____________ Hon. Susan Illston United States District Court Judge

-3-

CASE NO. C 06-3761 SI

Case 3:06-cv-03761-SI

Document 60

Filed 03/19/2009

Page 4 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

GENERAL ORDER 45 ATTESTATION

I, James F. Basile, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that David A. Silberman has concurred in this filing. /s/ James F. Basile James F. Basile

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL

-4-

CASE NO. C 06-3761 SI