Moss v. SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL HOSPITAL AND TRAUMA CENTER et al
Filing
38
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 37 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Extend Deadline to Mediate Under General Order 56 filed by Nicole Moss, City and County of San Francisco. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 3/10/17. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/10/2017)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
CELIA McGUINNESS, ESQ. (SBN 159420)
THE DERBY LAW FIRM P.C.
1255 Treat Blvd. Suite 300
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
Telephone: (925) 472-6640
Facsimile: (925) 933-3964
celia@derbydisabilitylaw.com
PAUL L. REIN, Esq. (SBN 43053)
LAW OFFICES OF PAUL L. REIN
200 Lakeside Drive, Suite A
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: 510/832-5001
Facsimile:
510/832-4787
reinlawoffice@aol.com
MICHAEL E. GATTO, Esq. (SBN 196474)
VAN BLOIS & ASSOCIATES
7677 Oakport Street, Suite 565
Oakland, CA 94621
Phone: 510.635.1284
Fax: 510.635.1516
mgatto@vanbloislaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
NICOLE MOSS
14
* Defendants and their counsel listed after the caption.
15
16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18
NICOLE MOSS,
19
Plaintiff,
20
v.
21
22
23
24
SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL
HOSPITAL AND TRAUMA CENTER;
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC HEALTH; CITY AND COUNTY
OF SAN FRANCISCO; and DOES 1-20,
INCLUSIVE,
25
CASE NO. 3:16-cv-00072 KAW
Civil Rights
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO
MEDIATE UNDER GENERAL ORDER 56
Defendants.
26
27
28
//
1
STIP TO EXTEND GO 56 DEADLINES
CASE NO. 3:16-cv-00072 KAW
C:\Users\IMBRIA~1\AppData\Local\Temp\notesF8C1A4\2017 02 23 stip to continue deadline to mediate.docx
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669
City Attorney
CHERYL ADAMS, State Bar #164194
Chief Trial Deputy
THOMAS S. LAKRITZ, State Bar #161234
Deputy City Attorney
Fox Plaza
1390 Market Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, California 94102-5408
Telephone: (415) 554-4218
Facsimile: (415) 554-3837
E-Mail: tom.lakritz@sfgov.org
Attorneys for Defendant
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
9
10
STIPULATION
11
Plaintiff NICOLE MOSS (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
12
FRANCISCO hereby jointly stipulate and request through their attorneys of record that the deadline
13
to Mediation under General Order 56 be continued from March 7, 2017, until May 31, 2017. The
14
relevant history of the case is as follows:
15
16
17
1. The original date for filing a Notice of Need for Mediation was June 1, 2016, Docket
No. 4.
2. Because the scope of the facilities at San Francisco General Hospital required more time
18
than usual for access experts to prepare a report, the parties stipulated to extend the
19
deadline for Plaintiff to file the Notice of Need for Mediation to December 15, 2016.
20
Docket No. 32.
21
3. Plaintiff filed the Notice of Need for Mediation on December 7, 2016. Docket No. 34.
22
4. The case was assigned a mediator on January 17, 2017. Docket No. 35.
23
5. Pursuant to General Order 56, the parties have 90 days from filing the Notice of Need
24
for Mediation to complete the mediation. Thus, the deadline to complete mediation is
25
March 7, 2017.
26
27
28
This request for an extension of time is based on the following good cause:
1. The parties have worked cooperatively to move through General Order 56.
2
STIP TO EXTEND GO 56 DEADLINES
CASE NO. 3:16-cv-00072 KAW
C:\Users\IMBRIA~1\AppData\Local\Temp\notesF8C1A4\2017 02 23 stip to continue deadline to mediate.docx
1
2
2. The parties have engaged in significant pre-mediation discussion via telephone
conference and email, facilitated by ADR Director Howard Herman.
3
3. The Parties agreed to join into this mediation another case, Moss v. Kindred Healthcare
4
Operating, Inc. et al., 4:16-cv-00657 YGR. The City of San Francisco is a defendant in
5
that matter as well. The Parties believe that mediating the cases together will facilitate a
6
more efficient resolution of all issues.
7
4. Due to the number of party representatives and attorneys involved in the two matters, the
8
Parties were unable to find a mutually agreeable date for mediation within the Court’s
9
deadline.
10
5. All parties have agreed to participate in mediation on May 9, 2017.
11
12
Therefore, in an effort to keep costs down and to facilitate efficient resolution of the case
13
through mediation and the General Order 56 process, the Parties stipulate and request that the Court
14
order the deadline for mediation to take place under General Order 56 be extended to May 31, 2017.
15
16
Date: March 3, 2017
17
THE LAW OFFICE OF PAUL L. REIN
THE DERBY LAW FIRM, P.C.
18
By:
/s/ Celia McGuinness
CELIA McGUINNESS, ESQ.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
NICOLE MOSS
19
20
21
22
Date: March 3, 2017
23
24
DENNIS J. HERRERA
City Attorney
CHERYL ADAMS
Chief Trial Deputy
THOMAS S. LAKRITZ
Deputy City Attorney
25
26
By:
/s/ Thomas S. Lakritz
THOMAS S. LAKRITZ, ESQ.
Attorneys for Defendant
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
27
28
3
STIP TO EXTEND GO 56 DEADLINES
CASE NO. 3:16-cv-00072 KAW
C:\Users\IMBRIA~1\AppData\Local\Temp\notesF8C1A4\2017 02 23 stip to continue deadline to mediate.docx
ORDER
1
2
Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, and for good cause shown, IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
The deadline for the parties to mediate under General Order 56 is hereby continued to May 31,
4
2017.
5
6
7
3/10
Dated: _________, 2017
U.S. Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIP TO EXTEND GO 56 DEADLINES
CASE NO. 3:16-cv-00072 KAW
C:\Users\IMBRIA~1\AppData\Local\Temp\notesF8C1A4\2017 02 23 stip to continue deadline to mediate.docx
FILER’S ATTESTATION
1
2
Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1, I hereby attest that on March 3, 2017, I, Celia McGuinness,
3
attorney with The Law Office of Paul L. Rein., received the concurrence of Thomas S. Lakritz in
4
the filing of this document.
5
/s/ Celia McGuinness
Celia McGuinness
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
STIP TO EXTEND GO 56 DEADLINES
CASE NO. 3:16-cv-00072 KAW
C:\Users\IMBRIA~1\AppData\Local\Temp\notesF8C1A4\2017 02 23 stip to continue deadline to mediate.docx
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?