Riese v. County of Del Norte et al
Filing
58
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND MOTION TO WITHDRAW. Initial Case Management Conference set for 7/25/2013 01:30 PM; Motion Hearing set for 7/25/2013 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 6/17/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2013)
1
2
3
Brian E. Claypool, Esq., State Bar# 134674
THE CLAYPOOL LAW FIRM
1055 East Colorado Blvd., 5th Floor
Pasadena, CA 91106
(626) 240-4616 (telephone)
(626) 796-9951 (fax)
4
5
6
Attorney For Plaintiff
MICHAEL RIESE
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
MICHAEL RIESE
13
14
15
16
17
18
Plaintiff,
vs.
COUNTY OF DEL NORTE, et. al
Defendants
) Case No.: CV-12-3723-RS
)
)
1. STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
)
CASE MANAGEMENT
)
CONFERENCE AND
)
HEARING ON MOTION TO
)
WITHDRAW
)
2. [PROPOSED] ORDER
)
) Date: June 20, 2013
) Time: 1:30 p.m.
) Ctrm: 3, 17th Floor
Complaint Filed: July 16, 2012
19
20
21
22
23
Counsels for Defendants and Plaintiff stipulate to the following:
Plaintiff’s counsel, Brian E. Claypool, was ordered not to fly for 14 days by his
doctor due to a severe blockage and inflammation in both of his ear canals. Over the past
24
25
26
2 weeks since returning on a flight from Austin, Mr. Claypool’s had been blocked
causing extreme fatigue, headaches, congestion and ear pain. When he consulted with an
27
28
ENT in Pasadena nearly 10 days ago he was prescribed a steroid to reduce inflammation
- 1 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CMC AND HEARING ON MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND PROPOSED ORDER
1
2
in the tubes leading to his ear drums, but the ENT failed to diagnose an upper respiratory
infection which was causing the inflamed congestion. Upon consulting a second ENT
3
4
5
specialist on June 10, Mr. Claypool was diagnosed with a serious upper respiratory
infection and ordered a steroid shot and an antibiotic. The ENT prescribed a 10 day
6
7
8
9
regimen of Penicillin in hope of eradicating infection and reducing swelling in the tubes
leading to my ears and advised against flying for at least 14 days and suggested rest.
Consequently, Mr. Claypool corresponded with all of defendants’ counsel to
10
11
regarding his condition and a continuance to the CMC and hearing. The parties have
12
agreed to stipulate to a short continuance of the June 20, 2013 hearing date to July 25,
13
14
15
16
2013, or, in the alternative, a date that is convenient for the Court that is at least two
weeks in the future.
All parties respectfully request the court issue an order continuing the initial Case
17
18
Management Conference and hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Withdraw to July 25, 2013,
19
or, in the alternative to a date that is convenient to the Court that is at least two weeks in
20
21
the future.
22
23
DATED: June 15, 2013 THE CLAYPOOL LAW FIRM
24
25
26
/s/ Brian E. Claypool
Brian E. Claypool
Attorney for Plaintiff
27
28
- 2 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CMC AND HEARING ON MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND PROPOSED ORDER
1
DATED: June 15, 2013 PATTON, WOLAN, CARLISE, LLP
2
/s/ Steven C. Wolan
Steven C. Wolan
Attorney for Defendant
County of Del Norte and Richard
Griffin
3
4
5
6
DATED: June 15, 2013 HUNT & JEPPSON, LLP
7
8
9
10
11
/s/ Jeremy B. Price
Jeremy B. Price
Attorney for Defendants
Crescent City, Crescent City
Police Department, Keith Doyle,
& Doug Plack
12
13
DATED: June 15, 2013 BRADLEY, CURLEY, ASIANO, BARRABEE, ABEL, &
KOWALSKI
14
15
16
17
/s/ Ann M. Asiano
Ann M. Asiano
Attorney for Defendant
Jon Alexander
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 3 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CMC AND HEARING ON MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND PROPOSED ORDER
[PROPOSED] ORDER
1
2
3
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Case
4
Management Conference and hearing on Motion to Withdraw be continued from
5
June 20, 2013 to
July 25, 2013 at 1:30 p.m.
6
7
DATED: 6/17/13
8
9
HON. RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 4 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CMC AND HEARING ON MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND PROPOSED ORDER
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?