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:
(415) 554-4674
Facsimile:
(415) 554-4699
E-Mail:
vince.chhabria@sfgov.org
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
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?