Ashley v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 71

Order by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore granting 70 Stipulation Regarding Independent Mental Examination of Plaintiff.(kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/7/2013)

Case3:12-cv-00045-JSW Document70 Filed02/07/13 Page1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669
City Attorney
CHERYL ADAMS, State Bar #164194
Chief Trial Deputy
BRADLEY A. RUSSI, State Bar #256993
Deputy City Attorney
Fox Plaza
1390 Market Street, Sixth Floor
San Francisco, California 94102-5408
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
E-Mail:
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, et al.

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

JAMESON ASHLEY,

14

Plaintiff,

15

vs.

16
17
18
19

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO, MICHAEL HENNESSEY,
individually and in his official capacity as
Sheriff of the San Francisco County Sheriff's
Department; and DOES 1 to 30,

Case No. CV-12-0045 JSW
STIPULATION REGARDING INDEPENDENT
MENTAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF;
____________
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Trial Date:

Defendants.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Stip. re. IME
Ashley v. CCSF, et al.; CV-12-0045 JSW

1

April 29, 2013

Case3:12-cv-00045-JSW Document70 Filed02/07/13 Page2 of 3

1

The parties stipulate as follows:

2

1.

On December 13, 2012, the parties submitted a joint letter regarding a discovery

3

dispute over the terms of Defendants’ proposed independent mental examination of Plaintiff. (Dkt.

4

62). That dispute was referred to Magistrate Judge Westmore. Judge Westmore requested that the

5

parties submit supporting declarations on January 28, 2013. (Dkt. 67).

6

2.

Plaintiff submitted a declaration from Dr. Michael Wilkes, who stated that due to a

7

recent change in Plaintiff’s condition, it is not medically advisable for Plaintiff to undergo an IME at

8

this time, and that it could be harmful to him. (Dkt. 68).

9
10
11

3.

As a result of this changed circumstance, the parties agree that no determination should

be made on the terms of Defendants’ proposed IME at this time.
4.

The parties agree that Judge Westmore should retain jurisdiction of this dispute, and

12

that the parties will file a joint letter updating the court on the status of the dispute within sixty days of

13

the date of the attached order.

14

5.

The parties agree to submit a separate request to continue the outstanding deadlines in

15

this case in order to accommodate the pending issue of the IME of Plaintiff.

16

Dated: February 7, 2013

17

DENNIS J. HERRERA
City Attorney
CHERYL ADAMS
Chief Trial Attorney
BRADLEY A. RUSSI
Deputy City Attorney

18
19
20
By:

21
22
23
24

Dated: February 7, 2013

26
27
28

SIMS, CURRAN & OCKEN
By:

25

/s/ Bradley A. Russi
BRADLEY A. RUSSI
Attorneys for Defendants
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, et al.

/s/ Stuart Curran*
STUART CURRAN
Attorney for Plaintiff JAMESON ASHLEY

* Pursuant to General Order 45, § X.B., the filer of this document attests that he has received the
concurrence of this signatory to file this document.
Stip. re. IME
Ashley v. CCSF, et al.; CV-12-0045 JSW

2

Case3:12-cv-00045-JSW Document70 Filed02/07/13 Page3 of 3

_____________

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2
3
4
5

Pursuant to the above stipulation, within sixty days of the date of this order, the parties are
ordered to file a joint letter updating the court as to the status of the discovery dispute regarding
Defendants’ proposed independent mental examination of Plaintiff.

6
7

Dated:_2/7/2013 _____________

__________________________________
HONORABLE KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

Stip. re. IME
Ashley v. CCSF, et al.; CV-12-0045 JSW

3

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28