Sincerny v. City of Walnut Creek
Filing
34
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 33 Stipulation and Proposed Order. Case Management Statement due by 11/14/2017; Case Management Conference set for 11/21/2017 02:00 PM. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/23/2017)
1
2
3
4
5
DAVID M. HELBRAUN (SBN 129840)
HELBRAUN LAW FIRM
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 3340
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: (415) 982-4000
Facsimile: (415) 421-0912
dmh@helbraunlaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
PAUL ALFRED SINCERNY
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
PAUL ALFRED SINCERNY,
Case No. C17-02616 HSG
12
Plaintiff,
13
vs.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
City of Walnut Creek; Walnut Creek Police
Department; Walnut Creek Police Sergeant
Ryan Hibbs; Walnut Creek Police Officer
Lee Herrington; Walnut Creek Police
Officer Brookshire; Walnut Creek Police
Officer Adams; Walnut Creek Police
Officer Ashley Roskos; Walnut Creek
Police Officer Njoroge; Walnut Creek
Police Officer Steve Bertolozzi; Walnut
Creek Police Detective Kim Gerstner;
Walnut Creek Police Officer Scott
Moorhouse; Walnut Creek Police Chief
Tom Chaplin, Rachel Melia Smith and
DOES 1-20,
22
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
MODIFY CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE DATE ORDER
Defendants.
23
24
WHEREAS the Court recently set October 31, 2017 as the new date for a Case
25
Management Conference in this matter and to discuss a due date for Plaintiff’s First Amended
26
Complaint; and
27
28
WHEREAS Plaintiff counsel is set for trial in State court to commence on October 30,
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MODIFY CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE ORDER
C17-02616 HSG
1
2017, in the matter of Cochran v. Lake, San Mateo Superior Court No. CIV531946, and the case
2
may “trail” some days and is otherwise expected to last for approximately two weeks; and
3
4
WHEREAS Plaintiff’s counsel is scheduled for hip replacement surgery on November
27, 2017 and will therefore be physically unavailable for about two weeks; and
5
6
WHEREAS plaintiff’s counsel and defense counsel have met and conferred to propose an
orderly modification to the Case Management Conference schedule;
NOW THEREFORE the parties, by and through their respective attorneys, have agreed
8
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
3480 BUSKIRK AVENUE, SUITE 250, PLEASANT HILL, CA 94523
TELEPHONE: (925) 939-5330
McNAMARA, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, BORGES & AMBACHER LLP
7
that good cause exists in the interest of the furtherance of justice that the schedule for the Case
9
Management Conference be adjusted such that the said Conference take place on Tuesday
10
November 21, 2017, and a joint Case Management Conference Statement be filed on November
11
14, 2017.
12
Dated: October 18, 2017
13
HELBRAUN LAW FIRM
By:
14
15
16
Dated: October 18, 2017
______/s/__Helbraun, David M
David M. Helbraun
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Paul Alfred Sincerny
17
MCNAMARA, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY,
BORGES & AMBACHER LLP
18
By:
21
/s/ Blechman, Noah G.
Noah G. Blechman
Attorneys for Defendants
City of Walnut Creek; Walnut Creek Police Sergeant
Ryan Hibbs; Walnut Creek Police Officer Lee
Herrington; Walnut Creek Police Officer Adams; and
Walnut Creek Police Officer Ashley Roskos
22
ORDER
19
20
23
PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION, AND GOOD CAUSE EXSITING
24
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:
25
XXX
26
XXX
27
XXX
28
XXX
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MODIFY CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE ORDER
C17-02616 HSG
2
1
2
3
4
The Ca Managem Confer
ase
ment
rence shall ta place on Tuesday November 21, 2017, and a
ake
n
joi Case Ma
int
anagement Conference Statement sha be filed o November 14, 2017.
C
all
on
IT IS SO ORDERE
S
ED
Da
ated: Octobe 23, 2017
er
5
By:_
___________
__________
______
Hon. Hay
ywood S. Gi
illiam, Jr.
District C
Court Judge
6
8
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
3480 BUSKIRK AVENUE, SUITE 250, PLEASANT HILL, CA 94523
TELEPHONE: (925) 939-5330
McNAMARA, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, BORGES & AMBACHER LLP
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MO
D
ODIFY CASE
ANAGEMENT CO
ONFERENCE DA ORDER
ATE
MA
C1
17-02616 HSG
3
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?