Cicala et al v. City of San Jose et al

Filing 58

ORDER CLARIFYING 34 ORDERS RELATING CLAIMS in Case No. C08-04032 JF; C09-02617 JW (PVT). The Court hereby clarifies that the Cicala and Heiman plaintiffs are free to settle their Monell claims as long as all parties to those actions, including the municipal defendants, stipulate that any settlement will not have any effect on the claims or defenses in the Valdez litigation. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on August 17, 2011. (jflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/17/2011) Modified on 8/17/2011 (cv, COURT STAFF).

1
2

**E-Filed 8/17/2011**

3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12

PAUL CICALA, ENRICO SAGULLO, ERICK
SANCHEZ,

13

Plaintiffs,

14
15

Case Number 5:08-cv-4032 JF (PSG)
ORDER1 CLARIFYING ORDERS
RELATING CLAIMS
[Re: Docket Nos. 25, 54]

v.
CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al.

16

Defendants.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

On June 10, 2009, the Court issued an order relating claims in the instant case and a laterfiled action pending before Judge Whyte, Valdez, et al. v. City of San Jose, et al., Case No. 5:09cv-00176 RMW (PSG). On March 25, 2010, the Court also related claims in Heiman v. Officer
Johnson, et al., 5:09-cv-2617 EJD (PSG). All three actions concern alleged civil rights
violations by San Jose police officers in the enforcement of Cal. Pen. Code § 647(f), and all three
seek relief pursuant to Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1989). The Court
concluded that it would promote judicial economy to coordinate the proceedings with respect to
the Monell claims, although it expressly did not relate the individual plaintiffs’ claims for
damages.

27
28

1

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

Case No. 5:08-cv-4032 JF (PSG)
ORDER CLARIFYING ORDERS RELATING CLAIMS
(JFLC1)

1

The Cicala and Heiman Plaintiffs now wish to settle their Monell claims and have

2

requested an order clarifying that they may do so. Administrative Motion Re: Right to Settle,

3

filed Aug. 5, 2011. The Valdez Plaintiffs assert that in light of the Court’s earlier rulings, the

4

Monell claims cannot be resolved without a global settlement involving all related cases.

5

However, nothing in the Court’s previous rulings prohibits the parties from resolving their

6

Monell claims independently. The Court hereby clarifies that the Cicala and Heiman plaintiffs

7

are free to settle their Monell claims as long as all parties to those actions, including the

8

municipal defendants, stipulate that any settlement will not have any effect on the claims or

9

defenses in the Valdez litigation.

10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

DATED: August 17, 2011

__________________________________
JEREMY FOGEL
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No. 5:08-cv-4032 JF (PSG)
ORDER CLARIFYING ORDERS RELATING CLAIMS
(JFLC1)