Cozzi et al v. County of Marin et al

Filing 123

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT re 122 Stipulation, filed by Margaret A. Turner, Joan G. Monteverdi, Mario Zamudio, Maria Cozzi, Yun Bin Hsu, Beverly Hodges, Gretchen Melendy, Martha Grigsby, Marybeth Pascale, County of Marin, Monica H. Patenaude. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 2/5/10. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

David M. Poore, SBN 192541 KAHN BROWN & POORE LLP 30 Fifth Street, Second Floor Petaluma, California 94952 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs PATRICK K. FAULKNER, COUNTY COUNSEL Sheila Shah Lichtblau SBN 167999 Stephen Raab, SBN 180939 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 275 San Rafael, CA 94903 Tel.: [phone], Fax: [phone] Attorney(s) for the County of Marin, Gretchen Melendy and Mariano Zamudio

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARIA COZZI, MARTHA GRIGSBY, BEVERLY HODGES, YUN BIN HSU, JOAN G. MONTEVERDI, MARYBETH PASCALE, MONICA H. PATENAUDE, MARGARET A. TURNER, THOMAS R. WATSON Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF MARIN; MARIO ZAMUDIO; GRETCHEN MELENDY; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.

Case No. 08 03633 PJH STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF MARTHA GRIGSBY

Defendants County of Marin, Mariano Zamudio and Gretchen Melendy (hereinafter "Defendants") and Plaintiffs MARIA COZZI; MARTHA GRIGSBY; BEVERLY HODGES; YUN BIN HSU; JOAN G. MONTEVERDI; MARYBETH PASCALE; MONICA H. PATENAUDE; and MARGARET A. TURNER (hereinafter "Plaintiffs") hereby agree and stipulate as follows: -1COZZI, ET AL. V. COUNTY OF MARIN, ET AL. U.S. DISTRICT COURT CASE NO. C08 03633 PJH

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF MARTHA GRIGSBY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WHEREAS Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on plaintiff Martha Grigsby's claims on January 6, 2010 with a hearing date of February 10, 2010 at 9:00 a.m. before Judge Hamilton in the United States District Court, Northern District of California ­ Oakland Courthouse; WHEREAS Plaintiffs' counsel is scheduled to commence a jury trial in the United States District Court, Northern District of California ­ San Francisco Courthouse on February 8, 2010 before the Hon. Maxine M. Chesney. Plaintiff's counsel recently attended the pre-trial conference in that matter, and Judge Chesney indicated that the case would proceed as scheduled. Judge Chesney has ordered that trial will take place between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. daily. As such, plaintiff's counsel would be unable to both attend a hearing in the instant matter before Judge Hamilton at 9:00 a.m. on February 10, 2010 in the Oakland Federal Courthouse and attend the trial proceedings at 8:30 a.m. on February 10, 2010 in the San Francisco Federal Courthouse. WHEREAS the parties have agreed to stipulate to allow the hearing on defendants' motion for summary judgment to be continued to accommodate plaintiffs' counsel's trial schedule. The parties propose the court keep the hearing on the same date and move the hearing time from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. to allow plaintiffs' counsel time to conclude trial proceedings and travel to the Oakland Federal Courthouse. Alternatively, the parties do agree and stipulate to move the hearing date as follows: · · · February 11, 2010 at or after 3:00 p.m.; February 12, 2010 at or after 3:00 p.m.; or any other date and/or time which is deemed appropriate by this Court with

the exception of February 16-19, 2010, in which defendants' counsel is unavailable. Plaintiffs' counsel anticipates that his February 8, 2010 trial should be concluded on or before February 22, 2010. Local Rule 7.7(b) states that after the opposition to a motion has been filed, the parties may stipulate in writing to continue a hearing. In the instant proceeding, this motion has been -2COZZI, ET AL. V. COUNTY OF MARIN, ET AL. U.S. DISTRICT COURT CASE NO. C08 03633 PJH

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF MARTHA GRIGSBY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

fully briefed by way of moving papers, opposition papers, and reply papers. As such, the parties submit the instant stipulated request. Date: February ___, 2010

PATRICK K. FAULKNER COUNTY COUNSEL By:________________________________ Sheila Lichtblau Deputy County Counsel Defendant County of Marin

Date: February ___, 2010

KAHN BROWN POORE

By:________________________________ David Poore, Attorneys for Plaintiffs

PROPOSED ORDER

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment currently scheduled for February 8, 2010 at 9:00 a.m. is hereby February 10 3:00 p.m. continued to _______________________, 2010 at __________________ .m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
S
ISTRIC ES D TC AT T

RT U O

February 5 Dated: _____________, 2009

UNIT ED

J

ER

N

F D IS T IC T O R

-3COZZI, ET AL. V. COUNTY OF MARIN, ET AL. U.S. DISTRICT COURT CASE NO. C08 03633 PJH

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFF MARTHA GRIGSBY

A

C

LI

FO

_______________________________ U.S. Districts J. HamiltonJudge ylli Court udge Ph
R NIA
NO

ERED O ORD IT IS S

RT

H