California Tow Truck Association v. City and County of San Francisco

Filing 49

ORDER granting 48 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 44 MOTION for Summary Judgment and 45 Cross-MOTION for Summary Judgment. Reset Hearing as to 44 MOTION for Summary Judgment , 45 Cross MOTION for Summa ry Judgment AND OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Motion Hearing reset for 2/22/2013 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 2/5/2013. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669
City Attorney
WAYNE SNODGRASS, State Bar #148137
VINCE CHHABRIA, State Bar #208557
Deputy City Attorneys
City Hall, Room 234
#1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, California 94102-4682
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
E-Mail:
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

CALIFORNIA TOW TRUCK
ASSOCIATION,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. C10-03184 CRB
STIPULATED APPLICATION TO CONTINUE
HEARING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DEFENDANT’S
CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT; ORDER

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
and DOES 1-50,
Defendants.

18
19

Hearing Date:
Time:
Judge/Place:

February 8, 2013
10:00 a.m.
The Honorable Charles R. Breyer
Courtroom 6, 17th Floor

Date Action Filed:
Trial Date:

20

July 12, 2010
None Set

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP & [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING MSJs
CASE NO. C10-03184 CRB

n:\pdf docs\3184tow.doc

STIPULATED APPLICATION

1
2

The parties jointly submit this ex parte application for a continuance of the hearing on

3

Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment,

4

which is presently scheduled for February 8, 2013. The purpose of this application is to accommodate

5

undersigned counsel for the City, who is presently operating under a tight deadline to prepare the brief

6

for the City and County of San Francisco in Hollingsworth v. Perry, United States Supreme Court

7

Case No. 12-144, involving the constitutionality of Proposition 8 (California's ban on marriage by

8

same-sex couples).

9
10
11

The parties respectfully request that the hearing on the cross-motions be continued to Friday,
February 22, 2013, or a subsequent date convenient to the Court.
IT IS SO STIPULATED:

12
13

Dated: February 5, 2013

14
15
16

DENNIS J. HERRERA
City Attorney
VINCE CHHABRIA
Deputy City Attorney
By: s/Vince Chhabria
VINCE CHHABRIA

17

Attorneys for Defendant
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Dated: February 5, 2013

LAW OFFICES OF BROOKS ELLISON
By: **s/Patrick Whalen
PATRICK J. WHALEN
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CALIFORNIA TOW TRUCK ASSOCIATION
**pursuant to GO 45, the electronic signatory has
obtained approval from this signatory.

26
27
28
STIP. & [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING MSJs
CASE NO. C10-03184 CRB

1

n:\pdf docs\3184tow.doc

1
ORDER

2
3
4

The hearing for Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant’s Cross-Motion for
Summary Judgment is continued to Friday, February 22, 2013, at 10:00 a.m.

5
Dated: February 5, 2013

S

RT

11

ER

H

12
13

er

R. Brey

FO

harles
Judge C

NO

10

R NIA

THE HONORABLE CHARLES R.D
DERE BREYER
SO OR
SSTATES DISTRICT
JUDGE, UNITED
IT I

LI

9

UNIT
ED

8

RT
U
O

7

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

A

6

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP. & [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING MSJs
CASE NO. C10-03184 CRB

2

n:\pdf docs\3184tow.doc