Espinosa et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 355

ORDER GRANTING AS MODIFIED 354 MOTION to Continue FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE. Final Pretrial Conference set for 8/4/2014 02:00 PM in Courtroom 5, 2nd Floor, Oakland.. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 2/4/14. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2014)

Case3:06-cv-04686-JSW Document354 Filed01/28/14 Page1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669
City Attorney
CHERYL ADAMS, State Bar #164194
Chief Trial Deputy
BLAKE P. LOEBS, State Bar #145790
PETER J. KEITH, State Bar #206482
Deputy City Attorneys
1390 Market Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, California 94102-5408
Telephone:
[phone] – Loebs
Telephone:
[phone] - Keith
Facsimile:
[phone]
E-Mail:
[e-mail]
E-Mail:
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
HEATHER FONG, in her official capacity,
JOHN KEESOR, MICHELLE ALVIS and
PAUL MORGADO

11
12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

KATHLEEN ESPINOSA, as a personal
representative of the Estate of decedent ASA
SULLIVAN; A.S., by and through his
Guardian ad Litem, NICOLE GUERRA,

Case No. C06-04686 JSW

Plaintiffs,

DEFENDANTS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
TO CONTINUE FINAL PRETRIAL
CONFERENCE; DECLARATION;
PROPOSED ORDER

vs.

[UNOPPOSED]

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO, HEATHER FONG, in her
capacity as Chief of Police; JOHN KESSOR,
MICHELLE ALVIS and PAUL MORGADO,
et al.,

Trial Date:

September 7, 2014

Current Pretrial Conf.: February 10, 2014

Defendants.

22
23
24
25

RELIEF REQUESTED
The Court continued the trial date in this matter from March 10 to September 8, 2014, but the

26

final pretrial conference date was not continued and remains set for February 10, 2014. Defendants

27

respectfully request that the pretrial conference be continued to either August 18 or August 25, 2014.

28

Plaintiffs do not oppose the request. (Keith Decl. ¶ 3.)
DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
TO CONTINUE FINAL PTC; CASE NO. C06-04686 JSW

1

n:\lit\li2012\061556\00899430.doc

Case3:06-cv-04686-JSW Document354 Filed01/28/14 Page2 of 4

BACKGROUND

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

This matter was set for trial in December 2013, but the Court continued the trial on its own
motion to March 10, 2014, with a final pretrial conference set for February 10, 2014. (Doc. 347.)
After trial was set for March 10, 2014, Plaintiffs requested a continuance due to Plaintiffs’
counsel’s pre-existing trial date, and Defendants stipulated to the continuance. The Court granted the
stipulated request and continued trial to September 8, 2014. (Doc. 353.) However, the stipulation and
order were silent concerning the final pretrial conference date, and therefore the final pretrial
conference remains on calendar for its original date, February 10, 2013 at 2 p.m.
GOOD CAUSE EXISTS TO CONTINUE THE FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
Defendants respectfully request that the final pretrial conference be continued to a date closer
to trial. Plaintiffs do not oppose the request. (Keith Decl. ¶ 2.)
Good cause exists because defendants’ lead trial counsel, Deputy City Attorney Blake Loebs,
is having back surgery tomorrow, the date of which just had to be advanced due to his increasing
symptoms, and his recovery time is expected to last for more than three weeks, past February 10.
(Keith Decl. ¶ 3.) Therefore, there is a need to continue the pretrial conference.
Defendants respectfully suggest that the final pretrial conference be continued to a date closer
to trial. Defendants note that the Court already held one final pretrial conference and that many legal
matters such as motions in limine were already resolved as a result. (Doc. 309 (civil minute order),
Doc. 336 (further ruling on motions in limine).) Therefore, the parties and the Court have already
obtained the benefit of an early final pretrial conference. Moving the currently scheduled final pretrial
conference closer to trial would more effectively permit the Court and the parties to address logistics,
scheduling, and any new matters that may arise over the next several months that will affect the
conduct of trial. (Keith Decl. ¶ 4.)
Therefore, Defendants respectfully propose that the final pretrial conference be set for Monday
August 18, 2014 at 2pm, or alternatively Monday August 25, 2014 at 2pm. Counsel anticipates not
being available on August 11, 2014. (Keith Decl. ¶ 5.)
//

27
28
DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
TO CONTINUE FINAL PTC; CASE NO. C06-04686 JSW

2

n:\lit\li2012\061556\00899430.doc

Case3:06-cv-04686-JSW Document354 Filed01/28/14 Page3 of 4

CONCLUSION

1
2

For the reasons discussed above Defendants respectfully request that the pretrial conference in

3

this matter be continued from February 10, 2014 to either August 18, 2014 or August 25, 2014 at 2:00

4

pm.

5

Dated: January 28, 2014
DENNIS J. HERRERA
City Attorney
CHERYL ADAMS
Chief Trial Deputy
BLAKE P. LOEBS
PETER J. KEITH
Deputy City Attorneys

6
7
8
9
By:

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

/s/ Peter J. Keith
PETER J. KEITH
Attorneys for Defendants
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
HEATHER FONG, in her official capacity,
JOHN KEESOR, MICHELLE ALVIS and
PAUL MORGADO

DECLARATION OF PETER J. KEITH
I, Peter J. Keith, declare:
1.

I am a Deputy City Attorney with the City and County of San Francisco. I have

personal knowledge of the contents of this declaration, and, if called upon to testify, I could and would
testify competently to the contents of this declaration.
2.

On January 27, I informed Plaintiffs’ counsel Ben Nisenbaum of Defendants’ request

for a continuance and proposed dates, and Mr. Nisenbaum informed me that Plaintiffs do not oppose
this request.
3.

My colleague Deputy City Attorney Blake Loebs and I are the two attorneys assigned

to respresent Defendants at trial, with Mr. Loebs as the lead counsel. Mr. Loebs informed me that he
is having back surgery tomorrow, the date of which just had to be advanced due to his increasing
symptoms, and his recovery time is expected to last for more than three weeks, past February 10.
4.

In my experience, a pretrial conference would likely be more effective for the parties

and the Court closer to trial. I expect that closer to trial counsel will know more about matters like

28
DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
TO CONTINUE FINAL PTC; CASE NO. C06-04686 JSW

3

n:\lit\li2012\061556\00899430.doc

Case3:06-cv-04686-JSW Document354 Filed01/28/14 Page4 of 4

1

witness availability and scheduling, as well as any appellate decisions that might bear on trial. In

2

addition, unforeseen matters may arise in the next several months that may need to be addressed closer

3

to trial. Therefore, I expect it to be more efficient for the Court, counsel, and parties to continue the

4

final pretrial conference to a date closer to trial.

5

5.

6

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is

7
8

I am unlikely to be available on Monday August 11 due to vacation plans.

true and correct.
Executed, January 28, 2014, at San Francisco, California.

9

/s/ Peter J. Keith
PETER J. KEITH

10
11

[PROPOSED] ORDER

12
13
14
15

GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, the Court hereby continues the pre-trial conference in this action
4
from February 10, 2014 at 2 p.m. to August 18, 2014 at 2 p.m.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17
18

February 4, 2014
Dated:___________

________________________________
HONORABLE JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
TO CONTINUE FINAL PTC; CASE NO. C06-04686 JSW

4

n:\lit\li2012\061556\00899430.doc