Sandoval et al v. County of Sonoma et al

Filing 108

STIPULATION AND ORDER to Establish Briefing Schedule on Motion to Dismiss and Reschedule Case Management Conference. Case Management Statement due by 10/11/2013. Further Case Management Conference set for 10/21/2013 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Motion Hearing set for 10/21/2013 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Thelton E. Henderson. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 08/20/2013. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/21/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

BRUCE D. GOLDSTEIN, State Bar No. 135970
County Counsel
ANNE L. KECK, State Bar No. 136315
Deputy County Counsel
Office of the Sonoma County Counsel
575 Administration Drive, Room 105A
Santa Rosa, CA 95403-2815
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant Sonoma County
Sheriff Steve Freitas in his personal capacity

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13
14

Case No. CV-11-05817 TEH

RAFAEL MATEOS-SANDOVAL and
SIMEON AVENDANO RUIZ, individually
and as class representatives,

JOINT STIPULATION TO (1) DISMISS
BANE ACT CLAIMS AGAINST PERSONALCAPACITY DEFENDANTS, (2) ESTABLISH
BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON MOTION TO
DISMISS, AND (3) RESCHEDULE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER

Plaintiffs,
v.

15

COUNTY OF SONOMA, SONOMA

16

STEVE FREITAS, CITY OF SANTA ROSA,
SANTA ROSA POLICE DEPARTMENT,
TOM SCHWEDHELM, and DOES 1 through
20, individually and in their official capacities,

17
18
19
20
21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED AS MODIFIED

Defendants.
______________________________________/
TO THE HON. THELTON E. HENDERSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
This Joint Stipulation to (1) Dismiss Bane Act Claims Against Personal-Capacity

23

Defendants, (2) Establish Briefing Schedule on Motion to Dismiss, and (3) Reschedule Case

24

Management Conference, is submitted by the following parties in this action: Plaintiffs Rafael

25

Mateos-

26

County Sheriff Steve Freitas

27

the City of Santa Rosa, Santa Rosa Police Department, and Santa Rosa Police Chief Tom

28

Joint Stipulation to (1) Dismiss Bane Act Claims
Against Personal-Capacity Defendants, et al.

; and Defendants

1

U.S.D.C. No. cv-11-05817 TEH

1

Defendants the County of Sonoma, Sonoma

2

sued in his official capacity are

3

not parties to this stipulation, as this action is currently stayed as to all claims against them based on

4

their pending appeal. (See e.g., Order entered April 10, 2013, Dkt. No. 92.)

5

The parties to this Stipulation request the Court to enter an order as follows: (1) approving

6

§ 52.1,

7

against the individual defendants sued in their personal capacities; (2) setting a briefing and hearing

8

schedule for

9

conference, which is currently set to be held on August 26, 2013, to enable it to be held concurrently

; and (3) rescheduling the case management

10

with the hearing on the motion to dismiss. The parties submit that good cause supports their

11

requests, as set forth below.
RECITALS

12
13

A.

14

Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Class Action Complaint for Damages (the
action on August 7, 2013 (Dkt. No. 105). Plaintiffs have re-alleged several claims in

15

their SAC that the Court dismissed without prejudice in its Order Granting in Part and Denying in

16

Part Motions to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 104), including but not limited to: (1) a

17

claim under California Civil Code §

18

capacity in Count 1; and (2) a claim against Sheriff Freitas in his personal capacity for due process

19

violations made under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in Count 4.

20

B.

Upon further consideration and pursuant to a discussion of counsel, Plaintiffs have

21

agreed to dismiss their Bane Act claim made against Sheriff Freitas in his personal capacity

22

contained in Count 1 of the SAC, and their Bane Act claim made against Defendant Santa Rosa

23

Police Chief Tom Schwedhelm

24

of the SAC. Upon such dismissal, no Bane Act claims will remain in the SAC against these two

25

individual defendants to the extent sued in their personal capacities; Bane Act claims shall remain in

26

the SAC only as to the entity defendants.

27
28

C.

Schwedhelm

in his personal capacity contained in Count 2

Sheriff Freitas has indicated his intent to file a motion to dismiss with respect to the

Joint Stipulation to (1) Dismiss Bane Act Claims
Against Personal-Capacity Defendants, et al.

2

U.S.D.C. No. cv-11-05817 TEH

1

due process claim brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 made against him in his personal capacity in

2

Count 4. The parties have agreed to a briefing and hearing schedule to address that motion.

3

D.

In addition, to conserve the resources of the Court and the parties, the parties request

4

that the further case management conference, currently scheduled to be held on August 26, 2013, be

5

rescheduled to enable it to be held concurrently with the hearing on the motion to dismiss. The

6

parties also request the ability to appear at the hearing and case management conference via

7

telephone.

8
9

WHEREFORE, the parties to this stipulation hereby agree and request entry of an order as
follows:
STIPULATION

10
11

1.

12

California

13

contained in Count 1 of the SAC, and against Chief Schwedhelm in his personal capacity contained

14

in Count 2 of the SAC.

15

2.

Plaintiffs hereby dismiss from this action with prejudice their claims made under
Civil Code § 52.1, against Sheriff Freitas in his personal capacity

The parties request the Court to extend the time in which Sheriff Freitas in his

16

personal capacity may respond to the SAC, and to set the briefing and hearing schedule on his

17

motion to dismiss the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 due process claim contained in Count 4 of the SAC as

18

follows:

19

Motion to Dismiss due:

August 30, 2013

20

Opposition to Motion to Dismiss due:

September 26, 2013

21

Reply re Motion to Dismiss due:

October 7, 2013

22

Motion to Dismiss hearing date (proposed): October 21, 2013, at 10:00 a.m.

23

3.

In addition, the parties request the Court to reschedule the further case management

24

conference, currently set to be held on August 26, 2013, so that it may be held concurrently with the

25

hearing on the motion to dismiss on October 21, 2013, or such later date as is convenient for the

26

Court.

27
28

Joint Stipulation to (1) Dismiss Bane Act Claims
Against Personal-Capacity Defendants, et al.

3

U.S.D.C. No. cv-11-05817 TEH

1
2
3

4.

Counsel for the parties also request the ability to appear at the hearing on the motion

to dismiss and the case management conference via telephone.
5.

Nothing in this Stipulation and request for order is intended to modify the other

4

matters addressed in any Court order unless expressly identified herein, nor does it preclude the

5

parties from seeking additional relief from this Court, to amend this stipulation and order or

6

otherwise.

7
8

Respectfully Submitted,
Dated: August 19, 2013

9

Bruce D. Goldstein, Sonoma County Counsel
By:

10
11
12

Dated: August 19, 2013

Caroline L. Fowler, Santa Rosa City Attorney
By:

13
14
15

Dated: August 19, 2013

/s/ Robert L. Jackson
Robert L. Jackson, Assistant City Attorney
Attorneys for City Defendants

Robert Mann & Donald W. Cook, Attorneys at Law
By:

16

/s/ Anne L. Keck
Anne L. Keck, Deputy County Counsel
Attorneys for Defendant Sonoma County
Sheriff Steve Freitas in his personal capacity

17

/s/ Donald W. Cook
Donald W. Cook
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Joint Stipulation to (1) Dismiss Bane Act Claims
Against Personal-Capacity Defendants, et al.

4

U.S.D.C. No. cv-11-05817 TEH

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2
3
4

Pursuant to and in accordance with the foregoing Stipulation, and with good cause appearing,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1.

The claims made under

California Civil Code § 52.1, against

5

Sheriff Freitas in his personal capacity contained in Count 1 of the SAC, and against Chief

6

Schwedhelm in his personal capacity contained in Count 2 of the SAC, are hereby dismissed from

7

this case with prejudice.

8
9
10

2.

The time in which Sheriff Freitas in his personal capacity may respond to the SAC

shall be extended, and the briefing and hearing schedule on his motion to dismiss the 42 U.S.C. §
1983 due process claim contained in Count 4 of the SAC shall be as follows:

11

Motion to Dismiss filed:

August 30, 2013

12

Opposition to Motion to Dismiss due:

September 26, 2013

13

Reply re Motion to Dismiss due:

October 7, 2013

14

Motion to Dismiss hearing date:

October 21, 2013, at 10:00 a.m.

15
16

3.

The further case management conference, currently set to be held on August 26,

2013, shall be rescheduled to October 21, 2013, at 10:00 a.m., so that it may be held concurrently

17

A joint case management statement shall be

18

filed 7 days prior.

19

4.

Counsel for the parties may appear at the hearing on the motion to dismiss and the

case management conference via telephone, pursuant to instructions to be provided by the Court.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22

08/20/2013
Date: _____________

ISTRIC
ES D
TC
AT
T

RT
U
O

S

20

AS M

RT

25
26

A

H

ER

rson

. Hende

helton E

Judge T

FO

NO

24

LI

23

R NIA

UNIT
ED

____________________________________
HONORABLEDERED
THELTON E. HENDERSON
O OR
UnitedIStatesDIFIED Judge
District
IT S S
O

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

27
28

Joint Stipulation to (1) Dismiss Bane Act Claims
Against Personal-Capacity Defendants, et al.

5

U.S.D.C. No. cv-11-05817 TEH