Wild Equity Institute et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 75

ORDER Concerning Plaintiffs' Reply Brief in Support of Motion For a Preliminary Injunction (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/27/2011)

Case3:11-cv-00958-SI Document74
1
2
3

Filed10/26/11 Page1 of 3

Brent Plater (CA Bar No. 209555)
WILD EQUITY INSTITUTE
PO Box 191695
San Francisco, CA 94119
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]

4
5
6
7
8

Eric R. Glitzenstein (D.C. Bar No. 358287)
Howard M. Crystal (D.C. Bar No. 446189)
Pro Hac Vice
MEYER GLITZENSTEIN & CRYSTAL
1601 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 700
Washington, D.C., 20009
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

9
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
10
11
12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

13

WILD EQUITY
INSTITUTE, a non-profit
corporation, et al.

14

Plaintiffs,

15

v.

16
17

CITY AND COUNTY OF
SAN FRANCISCO, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 3:11-CV-00958 SI
STIPULATION CONCERNING PLAINTIFFS’
REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR A
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Date: November 18, 2011
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Courtroom: 10, 19th Floor
Judge: Hon. Susan Illston

18
19
20
21

Plaintiffs Wild Equity Institute, et al., Defendants City and County of San Francisco, et
al., and Intervenor San Francisco Public Golf Alliance, by and through their respective
counsel, hereby stipulate to Plaintiffs filing one consolidated twenty-five (25) page Reply brief

22
23
24
25

in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction, as follows:
1.

On September 23, 2011, Plaintiffs filed a twenty-five (25) page motion for a

preliminary injunction (DN 53).

26
27
28
Wild Equity Inst. v. San Francisco, No. 3:11-CV-00958 SI
Stipulation

Case3:11-cv-00958-SI Document74
1
2
3
4

2.

Filed10/26/11 Page2 of 3

On October 21, 2011, Defendants filed a twenty-three (23) page Opposition to

Plaintiffs’ motion (DN 63). The same day Intervenors filed a seventeen (17) page Opposition
to Plaintiffs’ motion (DN 67).
3.

Local Rule 7-4 provides for 15 page Reply briefs. Rather than file separate

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

briefs responding to Defendants’ and Intervenor’s filings, Plaintiffs propose to file one
consolidated Reply brief not to exceed twenty-five (25) pages. Defendants and Intervenors
consent to this approach.
4.

Pursuant to the Court’s June 29, 2011 Case Management Order, Plaintiffs’

Reply brief is due on or before November 4, 2011.
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff, Defendants,

12
and Intervenor that on or before November 4, 2011, Plaintiffs may file one consolidated Reply
13
14
15
16

brief, not to exceed twenty-five (25) pages.
DATED: October 26, 2011

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Brent Plater
Brent Plater (CA Bar No. 209555)

17
18
19

/s/ Howard M. Crystal
Howard M. Crystal (D.C. Bar No. 446189)
MEYER GLITZENSTEIN & CRYSTAL
Pro Hac Vice

20
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

DENNIS J. HERRERA (CA 129669)
City Attorney
OWEN J. CLEMENTS (CA 141085)
JAMES M. EMERY (CA 153630)
VIRGINIA DARIO ELIZONDO (CA 134771
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEYS
By: /s/ Owen J. Clements
(authorized Oct. 26, 2011)
Attorneys for Defendants

28
Wild Equity Inst. v. San Francisco, No. 3:11-CV-00958 SI
Stipulation

Case3:11-cv-00958-SI Document74

Filed10/26/11 Page3 of 3

1

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

2

By: /s/ Christopher J. Carr
(authorized Oct. 26, 2011)

3

Attorney for Defendant-Intervenor

4
5
6
7
8

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:
_______________________
Judge Susan Illston

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Wild Equity Inst. v. San Francisco, No. 3:11-CV-00958 SI
Stipulation