Hauschild v. City of Richmond et al

Filing 42

ORDER GRANTING 41 STIPULATION EXTENDING THE DEADLINE TOCOMPLETE ADR; REQUEST FORREFERRAL TO PRIVATE MEDIATIONPROGRAM IN LIEU OF EARLYNEUTRAL EVALUATION.(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/19/2015)

1
2
3
4
5

David M. Poore, SBN 192541
BROWN | POORE LLP
1350 Treat Blvd., Suite 420
Walnut Creek, California 94597
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
THOMAS HAUSCHILD

6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHISN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

THOMAS HAUSCHILD,
Plaintiff,

13
14

v.

15
16
17

Case No. 3:15-cv-01556 WHA
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
EXTENDING THE DEADLINE TO
COMPLETE ADR; REQUEST FOR
REFERRAL TO PRIVATE MEDIATION
PROGRAM IN LIEU OF EARLY
NEUTRAL EVALUATION

CITY OF RICHMOND; CHRISTOPHER
MAGNUS; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
Defendants.

HON. WILLIAM ALSUP

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-1STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR ENE
HAUSCHILD V. CITY OF RICHMOND ET AL, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-01556 WHA

1

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the parties to this action, Plaintiff THOMAS

2

HAUSCHILD, and Defendants CITY OF RICHMOND and CHRISTOPHER MAGNUS, hereby

3

STIPULATE to extending the deadline in which to complete ADR. The current deadline to

4

complete ADR is October 15, 2015. Through this stipulation, the parties are jointly requesting

5

that this deadline be extended until December 18, 2015.

6

There exists good cause in which to extend this deadline, as (1) the schedules of the

7

participating parties did not allow for a mutually-agreeable date before October 15, 2015, (2)

8

there was some delay in scheduling the ENE, as the original Evaluator was required to recuse

9

herself due to an unforeseen conflict of interest after she had already scheduled the ENE session,

10

(3) the parties would like to complete some of the key discovery, including the deposition of the

11

Plaintiff, prior to participating in ADR believing that completion of that discovery will enhance

12

the ADR process, (4) Plaintiff has requested additional time to respond to outstanding discovery

13

because Plaintiff is in the process of responding to the defense motion for partial summary

14

judgment and (5) after further consideration, the parties are requesting a referral to the Court’s

15

private mediation, as opposed to ENE and request that the current ENE be converted to

16

mediation, as the parties believe that they will have better success in achieving a reasonable

17

settlement through the Court’s private mediation program, in lieu of ENE.

18

As noted immediately above, the parties are also jointly requesting a referral to the

19

Court’s private mediation program, as opposed to ENE. There exists good cause in which to

20

grant this request, as the parties have been engaging in the discovery process in advance of the

21

MSJ hearing in November 2015, and the parties believe that the better opportunity to achieve a

22

reasonable resolution of this case is through the Court’s private mediation program.

23
24
25
26

The parties are not making this request for the purpose of any undue delay, and no party
would suffer any prejudice if this stipulation was granted.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the parties that the compliance date for ADR be
extended until December 18, 2015.

27
28

-2STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR ENE
HAUSCHILD V. CITY OF RICHMOND ET AL, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-01556 WHA

1
2
3

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATED between the parties that this matter be referred
to the Court’s private mediation program, in lieu of the current referral to ENE.
SO STIPULATED.

4
5

Dated: October 15, 2015

/s/ Geoff Spellberg
GEOFF SPELLBERG
Attorneys for Defendants

6
7

Dated: October 15, 2015

8

/s/ David M. Poore
DAVID M. POORE
SCOTT A. BROWN
Attorneys for Plaintiff

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

CIVIL LOCAL RULE 5-1(i)(3) ATTESTATION
I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each
of the other signatories to this document.
DATED: October 15, 2015

By:

/s/David M. Poore
DAVID M. POORE
Attorney for Plaintiff

23
24
25
26
27
28

-3STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR ENE
HAUSCHILD V. CITY OF RICHMOND ET AL, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-01556 WHA

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2

GOOD CAUSE SHOWING, the Stipulation is GRANTED.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline for the completion of ADR shall be
extended until December 18, 2015.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is referred to the ADR unit for the
assignment of a private mediator. The parties are ordered to complete private mediation, in lieu
of ENE, no later than December 18, 2015.
SO ORDERED.

10
11
12

Dated: October __, 2015
19

___________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-4STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR ENE
HAUSCHILD V. CITY OF RICHMOND ET AL, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-01556 WHA