Steinhart v. County of Sonoma et al

Filing 29

SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER re 28 to extend county defendants' time to file an anti-slapp motion under cal.ccp section 425.16(f). Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/29/10. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Certificate of Service)(cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/29/2010)

Steinhart v. County of Sonoma et al

Doc. 29

*E-Filed 11/29/10*

1 STEVEN M. WOODSIDE, State Bar No. 58684 2 ANNE L. KECK, State Bar No. 136315 3 County of Sonoma
Deputy County Counsel 575 Administration Drive, Room 105A Telephone: [phone] County Counsel

4 Santa Rosa, California 95403-2815 5 Facsimile: [phone] 6

E-mail: [e-mail]

7 Attorneys for Defendants the County of

8 and County employees Michael Shanahan,
Caroline Jaap, Jo Weber, Nicholas Honey,

Sonoma, Sheriff-Coroner William Cogbill,

9 Jerry Allen, Betty Johnson, and Robin Smith 10 11 12 13 14 SALLY STEINHART, 15 16
v. BILL COGBILL and DEPUTY SHERIFFS M. SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR JO SERVICES DIVISION DIRECTOR CAROL Plaintiff, STIPULATION (SECOND) TO EXTEND COUNTY DEFENDANTS' TIME TO FILE AN ANTI-SLAPP MOTION UNDER CAL. CCP SECTION 425.16(f); [PROPOSED] ORDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION No. CV-10-00841 RS

17 COUNTY OF SONOMA, SHERIFF-CORONER 18 SHANAHAN and CAROLYN JAAP; HUMAN 19 WEBER; FAMILY, YOUTH & CHILDREN'S 20 BAUER; YOUTH & CHILDREN'S SERVICES 21 CHILD WELFARE SERVICES/ PROTECTIVE 22 BETTY JOHNSON, and ROBIN SMITH,
individually and in their official capacities, DIVISION DIRECTOR NICHOLAS HONEY; SERVICES SOCIAL WORKERS JERRY ALLEN,

23 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL 24 MOES 1-50, inclusive, jointly and severally, 25 26 27 28
Stipulation (Second) to Extend County

SERVICES; DOES 1-50, and ROES 1-50, and Defendants.

/

Defendants' Time to File an Anti-SLAPP Motion Under Cal. CCP Section 425.16(f); [proposed] Order

Dockets.Justia.com

1

This joint stipulation and request for entry of order pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12 is

2 entered into by and between Plaintiff in pro per, Sally Steinhart ("Plaintiff"), and Defendants the 3 County of Sonoma, Sheriff-Coroner William Cogbill, and County employees Michael Shanahan, 4 Caroline Jaap, Jo Weber, Nicholas Honey, Jerry Allen, Betty Johnson and Robin Smith (collectively, 5 "County Defendants"). Defendant the California State Department of Social Services is not a party 6 to this stipulation. 7
This stipulation and concomitant request for an Order is based upon County Defendants'

8 request to extend the time in which to file an Anti-SLAPP Motion under California Code of Civil 9 Procedure Section 425.16 for an additional 63 days, to February 3, 2011. The terms and provisions 10 of this stipulation and request for order are set forth below. 11 12
A. RECITALS Plaintiff filed her Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Damages

13 herein on February 26, 2010. Plaintiff believes that she effectuated service of the Complaint on all 14 County Defendants identified above on or about May 12, 2010. Plaintiff has not yet effectuated 15 service on Defendant the State Department of Social Services, nor Defendant and former Sonoma 16 County employee Carol Bauer (retired). 17
B. Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and

18 Damages (the "First Amended Complaint") on June 21, 2010. 19
C. County Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint and

20 concurrent Motion for More Definite Statement on July 26, 2010 (hereinafter collectively, "Motion 21 to Dismiss"). In their Motion to Dismiss, County Defendants request dismissal of all claims for 22 relief alleged against them in the First Amended Complaint. 23
D. County Defendants' Motion to Dismiss was initially noticed to be heard on

24 September 9, 2010, and was later continued by stipulation and order to September 30, 2010. 25
E. On September 27, 2010, the Court entered a Clerk's Notice, in which the Court

26 deemed the Motion to Dismiss submitted without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), 27 28
Stipulation (Second) to Extend County

Defendants' Time to File an Anti-SLAPP Motion Under Cal. CCP Section 425.16(f); [proposed] Order

1 and vacated the September 30th hearing date (Dkt No. 22). As of the date of this submission, the 2 parties have not received a decision from the Court resolving the Motion to Dismiss. 3
D. If certain issues are not resolved pursuant to the Motion to Dismiss, County

4 Defendants intend to file an Anti-SLAPP Motion under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 5 425.16 (see Exhibit A). The Anti-SLAPP Motion would request this Court to strike all state law 6 claims and related allegations made in the First Amended Complaint against the County's Human 7 Services Department employee defendants, on ground that the claims challenge protected speech 8 activities by governmental entities and their representatives. 9
E. Under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 426.16(f), Anti-SLAPP motions

10 should be brought within 60 days of the service of the relevant complaint. However, under 11 California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16(f), the Court has the discretion to extend the 60 12 day filing period to "any later time upon terms it deems proper." 13
F. Upon a stipulation of the parties, the Court has previously granted County Defendants

14 an extension of time to file its Anti-SLAPP motion to December 2, 2010, to permit resolution of the 15 Motion to Dismiss prior to the filing of such motion (Dkt No. 17). 16
G. County Defendants request an additional extension of time in which to file its Anti-

17 SLAPP motion, to February 3, 2011, to allow the Court to issue a decision in the pending Motion to 18 Dismiss prior to filing such motion. Such a request is made for the purpose of conserving the 19 resources of the parties and the Court, as the underlying grounds for the Anti-SLAPP Motion would 20 become moot if this Court grants the Motion to Dismiss as to the County's Human Services 21 Department employees named as defendants in the case. 22 23 24
1. WHEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and request entry of a court order as follows: STIPULATION County Defendants shall have until and including February 3, 2011, in which to file

25 and serve their Anti-SLAPP motion under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16. 26 /// 27 /// 28
Stipulation (Second) to Extend County

Defendants' Time to File an Anti-SLAPP Motion Under Cal. CCP Section 425.16(f); [proposed] Order

1

2.

This stipulation does not prevent or preclude the parties from seeking additional relief

2 from this Court, to amend this stipulation and order or otherwise. 3 4 Dated: November 29, 2010 5 6 7 Dated: November 29, 2010 8 9 10 11 12 13
* Respectfully submitted, Steven M. Woodside, County Counsel By: /s/ Anne L. Keck Anne L. Keck, Deputy County Counsel Attorneys for County Defendants

Sally Steinhart, Plaintiff in pro per By: s/s Sally Steinhart Sally Steinhart * [PROPOSED] ORDER *

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, and with good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that County Defendants shall have up to and including February 3,

14 2011, in which to file and serve their Anti-SLAPP motion under California Code of Civil Procedure 15 Section 425.16.
11/29/10 16 Date: _____________ ___________________________________ HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG United States District Judge

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Stipulation (Second) to Extend County

Defendants' Time to File an Anti-SLAPP Motion Under Cal. CCP Section 425.16(f); [proposed] Order