Cicala et al v. City of San Jose et al

Filing 25

ORDER RELATING CLAIMS IN PART WITH CASE #09-cv-176-RMW, DOCKET ENTRY #(21), DATED 06/10/2009. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 6/10/2009. (jflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/10/2009)

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
1

**E-Filed 6/10/09**

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

PAUL CICALA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al., Defendant.

Case No. C 08-04032 JF (PVT) (This order also is to be filed in Case No. C 09-00176 RMW (PVT)) ORDER1 RELATING CLAIMS

Pursuant to Civ. L. R. 3-12, the Court has considered whether Valdez v. City of San Jose, C 09-00176 RMW (PVT), a later-filed action pending before the Honorable Ronald M. Whyte, should be related wholly or in part to the instant case. The Court has conferred with Judge Whyte, and counsel for the parties in both matters have been afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard. Both of the cases in question concern alleged civil rights violations by police officers of the City of San Jose in the enforcement of Cal. Pen. Code § 647(f). Plaintiffs in the instant case assert individual claims for damages and also seek relief pursuant to Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1989). Plaintiffs in Valdez assert individual claims for damages and also allege claims on behalf of a purported class that allegedly has been subjected to the

This disposition is not appropriate for publication in the official reports.

O R D E R RELATING CLAIMS C a s e No. C 08-04032 JF (PVT) / C 09-00176 RMW (PVT)

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

same policies, customs and practices challenged by the Monell claim in the instant case. Counsel for all parties agree that the disputed factual issues with respect to the individual plaintiffs' claims for damages are distinct and that relating those claims would not promote judicial economy. It is apparent, however, that it would promote judicial economy to coordinate the proceedings with respect to the Monell and class-action claims. In addition, counsel in Valdez agree that status of the class-action claims in that case should be resolved prior to trial of the individual claims for damages in that case. Accordingly, and good cause therefor appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. The class-action claims in Valdez v. City of San Jose are hereby related to the abovecaptioned case for all purposes; 2. Any discovery disputes with respect to the related claims shall be heard by Magistrate Judge Patricia V. Trumbull; 2. The remaining claims in Valdez v. City of San Jose are hereby stayed pending disposition of the class-action claims or until further order of the Court; 3. Upon dissolution of the stay, the remaining claims in Valdez v. City of San Jose shall proceed before Judge Whyte.

DATED: 6/10/09

______________________ JEREMY FOGEL United States District Judge

2
O R D E R RELATING CLAIMS C a s e No. C 08-04032 JF (PVT) / C 09-00176 RMW (PVT)

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

Copies of Order served on:

Andrew Vinson Stearns [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail] Clifford S. Greenberg [e-mail] Ignascio Gallegos Camarena , II [e-mail] M. Jeffery Kallis [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

3
O R D E R RELATING CLAIMS C a s e No. C 08-04032 JF (PVT) / C 09-00176 RMW (PVT)