Dixon v. City of Oakland et al
Filing
38
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION 37 . Settlement Conference set for 12/17/2013 09:30 AM in Courtroom A, 15th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 8/21/13. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/21/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
MICHAEL J. HADDAD (State Bar No. 189114)
JULIA SHERWIN (State Bar No. 189268)
GINA ALTOMARE (State Bar No. 273099)
GENEVIEVE K. GUERTIN (State Bar No. 262479)
HADDAD & SHERWIN
505 Seventeenth Street
Oakland, California 94612
Telephone: (510) 452-5500
Fax: (510) 452-5510
Attorneys for Plaintiff
PETER DIXON
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
PETER DIXON individually,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
vs.
CITY OF OAKLAND and the
OAKLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT,
public entities, SERGEANT BERNARD
ORTIZ, OFFICER STEVEN TORIBIO,
OFFICER PATRICK GERRANS,
OFFICER ROBERT GERRANS,
OFFICER R. GARCIA, PERSONAL
PROTECTIVE SERVICES, INC., a
California corporation, DEMONT
MARROW, STANLEY TEETS,
MEREDITH WILSON, RENE GARCIA,
LADALE SLOCUM and DOES 5
through 10, individually, jointly and
severally,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. C12-5207 DMR
___________
STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED)
ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
Defendants.
24
25
26
27
28
ALL PARTIES, THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD, HEREBY
STIPULATE, AND REQUEST THIS COURT TO ORDER, THAT the settlement conference
_________
Case No. C12-5207 DMR - STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
1
1
currently scheduled before Magistrate Judge Cousins for September 12, 2013 at 9:30 a.m. be
2
rescheduled to December 17, 2013. The reason for this requested continuance is that, in the
3
parties’ estimation, the case is not in a settlement posture due to discovery that remains to be
4
completed.
5
6
Plaintiff has not yet had an opportunity to depose the individual defendants in this matter.
These depositions are currently scheduled to occur during early to mid-September. Additionally,
7
8
9
10
Defendants have not yet deposed Plaintiff. The parties anticipate these depositions will be
completed by December 2013 and that they will then be in a position to evaluate this case for
settlement.
11
12
SO STIPULATED:
13
14
DATED: August 20, 2013
HADDAD & SHERWIN
15
/s/ Michael J. Haddad*
16
MICHAEL J. HADDAD
Attorneys for Plaintiff PETER DIXON
17
18
19
DATED: August 20, 2013
20
21
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY OF
OAKLAND
/s/ Arlene M. Rosen*________________
ARLENE M. ROSEN, Senior Deputy City Attorney
Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF OAKLAND,
BERNARD ORTIZ, STEVEN TORIBIO, PATRICK
GERRANS, ROBERT GERRANS and R. GARCIA
22
23
24
//
25
//
26
//
27
28
_________
Case No. C12-5207 DMR - STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
2
1
2
3
4
5
DATED: August 20, 2013
BREMER WHYTE BROWN & O’MEARA LLP
/s/ Lance Pedersen*_____________________
LANCE PEDERSEN
Attorneys for Defendants PERSONAL
PROTECTIVE SERVICES, INC., DEMONT
MARROW, STANLEY TEETS, LADALE
SLOCUM, MEREDITH WILSON and RENE
GARCIA
6
7
8
*Mr. Haddad, Ms. Rosen and Mr. Pedersen provided their consent that this document be
electronically filed.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
________
Case No. C12-5207 DMR - STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
3
___________
(PROPOSED) ORDER
1
2
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. The settlement conference
3
scheduled for September 12, 2013 at 9:30 a.m. is rescheduled for December 17, 2013 at
4
________________.
9:30 a.m.
5
12
S
R NIA
FO
Cousins
LI
ER
H
11
HONORABLE NATHANAEL M. COUSINS
United States Magistrate Judge
RT
10
.
thanael M
Judge Na
TED
A
9
UNIT
ED
8
Dated: _______________
August 21, 2103
GRAN
NO
7
RT
U
O
6
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. C12-5207 DMR - STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER TO CONTINUE SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
4
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?