Green v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 57

ORDER GRANTING TWO WEEK EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; CONTINUING HEARING. The hearing on defendants' motion for summary judgment is continued to October 24, 2008. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on September 18, 2008. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2008)

Download PDF
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 Kenneth N. Frucht, State Bar No. 178881 LAW OFFICES OF KENNETH FRUCHT 120 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: (415) 392-4844 Fax: (415) 392-7973 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RONALD GREEN, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, THOMAS ABRAHAMSEN, ) ) LORENZO ADAMSON, DAVID OBERHOFFER, JERRY KING, MICHAEL ) WILLIAMS, RAMON BUNAG, ESTHER ) ) GRANIZO, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, ) ) Defendants. CASE NO.: C 07-3433 MMC STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING TWO WEEK EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ; ORDER CONTINUING HEARING Plaintiff's opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is on currently due on September 19, 2008. Due to time commitments in another case, Plaintiff's counsel has requested, and the parties have agreed to extend the briefing schedule by two weeks. Therefore, the parties by and through their respective counsel, hereby agree to extend the briefing schedule as follows: 10/3/08 10/10/08 10/24/08 Plaintiff's Opposition Papers Due Defendants' Reply Papers Due Hearing __________/s/______________ Donald Margolis Attorney For Defendants/Respondents __________/s/______________ Kenneth Frucht Attorney For Plaintiff IT IS SO ORDERED Dated: September 18, 2008 ___________________________ Honorable Maxine M. Chesney United States District Judge -1- PROPOSED ORDER

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?