Saavedra v. Hedgpeth et al

Filing 174

ORDER granting 172 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Regarding The Settlement Payment filed by M. Valdez, J. J. Hughes, A. Hedgpeth, R. Martinez. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 2/13/2013. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/19/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General of California
THOMAS S. PATTERSON
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
MICHAEL J. QUINN
Deputy Attorney General
State Bar No. 209542
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Valdez, Martinez, Hughes,
and Hedgpeth

8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
11
12
13

MICHAEL ANTHONY SAAVEDRA,

14
v.

15

C 09-0178 CRB

Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER
REGARDING THE SETTLEMENT
PAYMENT

16
A. HEDGPETH, et al.,
17
Defendants.
18
19
20

Plaintiff Michael Anthony Saavedra (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Anthony Hedgpeth, et al.

21

(“Defendants”) (collectively, “the Parties”) hereby submit this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order

22

Regarding the Settlement Payment.
STIPULATION

23
24

1.

The Settlement Agreement that the parties entered into on December 19, 2012

25

provides that “CDCR will attempt to make the settlement payment as soon as reasonably possible,

26

[but] the parties understand that this payment can take up to 180 days from the signing of this

27
28
1
Type Footer Info Here («Matter Primary Court Case #»)
US_ACTIVE-111921007.1-SWURTH 02/19/2013 2:26 PM

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

settlement agreement. Timing of the payment is contingent on funding, including the absence of
a state budget; additional delays may occur through no fault of CDCR.”
2.

In its January 15, 2013 Order of Dismissal, this Court stated that the Order would

stand vacated and the case would be restored to the calendar to be set for trial if any party
certified to the Court that the settlement payment had not been delivered within thirty days of the
Order.
3.

The Parties acknowledge that, as provided in the settlement agreement, CDCR likely

will not be able to provide the settlement payment to Plaintiff within 30 days of the Order of
Dismissal.
THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE and request that the Court (1) refrain from vacating
the January 15, 2013 Order of Dismissal if the settlement payment has not been made within 30
days of the Order, in order to allow sufficient time for CDCR to satisfy its settlement obligations,
and (2) amend the Order of Dismissal to provide that Plaintiff, between June 17, 2013 and July
17, 2013, may alert the Court if the settlement payment has not been paid as provided in the
Court’s January 15, 2013 Order which will vacate the order of Dismissal and the matter shall be
restored to the calendar to be set for trial.

17
18

Dated: February 4, 2013

___/s/ Alicia Baiardo__________________
ALICIA BAIARDO
REED SMITH LLP
Attorney for Plaintiff Michael Saavedra

Dated: February 4, 2013

_____/s/ Michael J. Quinn_______________
MICHAEL J. QUINN
Deputy Attorney General
Attorney for Defendants
Valdez, Martinez, Hughes, and Hedgpeth

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding the Settlement Payment (C 09-0178 CRB)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

ORDER
In order to allow CDCR sufficient time to satisfy its settlement obligations, the Court’s
January 15, 2013 Order of Dismissal will not be vacated if the settlement payment has not been
made within 30 days of the Order. Furthermore, the Order is hereby amended to provide that
Plaintiff, between June 17, 2013 and July 17, 2013, may certify to this Court that the agreed
consideration has not been paid and the Order of Dismissal will thereby be vacated and the case
be restored to the calendar and set for trial.

8
9

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

10
Dated: February 13, 2013

S
UNIT
ED

ER

H

17
18

er

R. Brey

FO

RT

SF2009202306
Saavedra Revised Stip (2).docx

harles
Judge C

NO

15

LI

14

R NIA

_______________________________
DERED
SO OR
The Honorable Charles R. Breyer
IT IS
United States District Court Judge

13

16

RT
U
O

12

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

A

11

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding the Settlement Payment (C 09-0178 CRB)