Heiman v. Johnson et al

Filing 34

ORDER RELATING CLAIMS IN PART WITH CASE #08-cv-4032-JF, DOCKET ENTRY (#38), DATED 03/25/2010. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 3/25/2010. (jflc2, COURT STAFF)

1 2 3 **E-Filed 3/25/2010** 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

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., Defendants.

Case No. C 08-04032 JF (PVT) (This order also is to be filed in Case No. C 09-02617 JW (PVT)) ORDER1 RELATING CLAIMS

Pursuant to Civ. L. R. 3-12, the Court has considered whether Heiman v. Officer Johnson, et al., C 09-02617 JW (PVT), a later-filed action pending before Judge Ware, should be related in part to the instant case. The motion is unopposed. The Court addressed an almost identical motion when Plaintiffs moved to relate another case, Valdez v. City of San Jose, 09-00176 RMW (PVT), to the instant action. The Court granted that motion on June 10, 2009. As was true in that instance, both cases at issue here concern alleged civil rights violations by San Jose police officers 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). Plaintiff in Heiman asserts an individual claim for damages and also alleges a claim that he 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 09-02617 JW (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. Plaintiffs concede that the disputed factual issues with respect to the Heiman plaintiff's claim for damages are distinct and that relating that claim would not promote judicial economy. It is apparent, however, that it would promote judicial economy to coordinate the proceedings with respect to the injunctive relief sought as to the Monell claims in both actions. The Court, as it did in its previous order relating the instant action and Valdez, concludes that the status of the Monell claim in Heiman v. Officer Johnson, et al. should be resolved prior to trial of the individual claim for damages. Accordingly, and good cause therefor appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. Plaintiff's claim for injunctive relief under the Monell theory of municipal liability in Heiman v. Officer Johnson, et al. is hereby related to the above-captioned 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 Heiman v. Officer Johnson, et al. are hereby stayed pending disposition of related claims or until further order of the Court; 3. Upon dissolution of the stay, the remaining claims in Heiman v. Officer Johnson, et al. shall proceed before Judge Ware.

DATED: 3/25/2010 ______________________ 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 09-02617 JW (PVT)