C.D.D.S. v. City of San Pablo

Filing 24

ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS AND FURTHER ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 8/16/17. Show Cause Response due by 8/23/2017. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/16/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 Plaintiff, 8 CITY OF SAN PABLO, Defendant. 11 United States District Court Northern District of California ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS AND FURTHER ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. 9 10 Case No. 17-cv-00414-JSW C.D.D.S., 12 On July 31, 2017, the Court issued an order to show cause why counsel for Plaintiff, Lateef 13 14 H. Gray, Esq., and counsel for Defendant, Claudia Leed, Esq., should not each be sanctioned 15 $250.00 for failing to comply with the Court’s orders. (Dkt. No. 22.) Specifically, the Court 16 noted that counsel had failed to file a timely joint case management statement and had filed an 17 untimely request to continue the case management conference. Counsels’ responses were due by 18 Friday, August 11, 2017. 19 A. 20 The Order to Show Cause Is Discharged as to Ms. Leed. The Court has reviewed Ms. Leed’s response. By way of explanation, but not excuse, Ms. 21 Leed indicates that on Friday, July 28, 2017, while she was on vacation, Mr. Gray contacted her 22 requesting that she stipulate to continuing the case management conference. (Dkt. No. 23, at 2.) 23 Ms. Leed agreed and revised the proposed stipulation and returned it to Mr. Gray. (Id.) Mr. Gray 24 did not file the stipulation until the following Monday, July 31, 2017, after being contacted by the 25 Court regarding the missing joint case management statement. (Id.) 26 The Court notes that even had the stipulation been filed on Friday, July 28, 2017, it still 27 would have been untimely. This Court’s May 19, 2017 order setting the case management 28 conference provides that any request to reschedule the conference must be made at least ten 1 cal lendar days before the co b onference da (Dkt. No 20, at 2.) ate. o. 2 Noneth heless, in ligh of the circ ht cumstances d described in Ms. Leed’s response, an given Ms. nd 3 ed’s y nition of the importance of complyin with the C ng Court’s order the Court rs, t Lee apology and recogn 4 HE EREBY DISCHARGES the order to show cause as to Ms. L e Leed. Ms. Le is admon eed nished that 5 goi forward, her obligati ing ions to comp with Cou orders ma not be del ply urt ay legated to an nother 6 atto orney. 7 B. By cont trast, the Co has not reviewed Mr Gray’s res ourt r r. sponse for th simple rea he ason that Mr. 8 9 Mr. Gra Is Sanctio ay oned $250.00. ay iled ccordingly, th Court HE he EREBY IMP POSES sanct tions in the a amount of Gra has not fi one. Ac $25 50.00 on Mr Lateef H. Gray, Esq., for his failur to comply with this Co r. G f re y ourt’s May 1 2017 19, 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 ord setting th case mana der he agement con nference in th action. M Gray sha pay that a his Mr. all amount to 12 the Clerk of the Court by no later than Wednesday August 23, 2017, and h shall not p the e e n y, , he pass 13 am mount of the sanctions on to his client s n t. 14 C. 15 Mr. Gra Is Furthe Ordered to Show Caus Why Furt ay er o se ther Sanction Should No Issue. ns Not The Co ourt’s prior order to show cause conc o w cluded by sta ating: “Coun are furth nsel her 16 adm monished that any future non-compl e liance with th Court’s o he orders (inclu uding the Cou urt’s 17 standing orders will be me with appro s) et opriate sanct tions.” (Dkt No. 22, at 2.) As just d t. detailed, Mr r. 18 ay d w urt’s order to show cause. Accordin o ngly, Mr. Lat H. teef Gra has failed to comply with the Cou 19 Gra Esq. is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court s ay, O T C y should not im mpose monetary 20 san nctions in the amount of $500.00 for failure to co e r omply with C Court orders Mr. Gray’s response s. 21 is due by Wedn d nesday, Aug 23, 2017 gust 7. 22 Failure of Mr. Gray to respond to this order shall be me with addit y r et tional sanctio ons. 23 IT IS SO ORDER S RED. 24 25 26 Da ated: August 16, 2017 ___ __________ ___________ __________ ________ JEF FFREY S. W WHITE Un nited States D District Judg ge 27 28 2

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?