City of San Jose v. San Jose Police Officers Association et al

Filing 92

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh denying 91 Stipulation.(lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

CITY OF SAN JOSE,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
SAN JOSE POLICE OFFICERS’
)
ASSOCIATION; SAN JOSE FIREFIGHTERS, )
I.A.F.F LOCAL 230; MUNICIPAL
)
EMPLOYEES’ FEDERATION, AFSCME,
)
LOCAL 101; CITY ASSOCIATION OF
)
MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL, IFPTE,
)
LOCAL 21; INTERNATIONAL UNION OF
)
OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL NO. 3;
)
and DOES 1-10,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No.: 12-CV-02904-LHK
ORDER RE: STIPULATION RE:
BIFURCATED PROCEDURE FOR
MOTION BY SAN JOSE POLICE
OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION FOR
DETERMINATION OF ENTITLEMENT
OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES

The parties have filed a stipulation requesting that the Court allow the parties to bifurcate

21

the briefing associated with Defendant San Jose Police Officers’ Association’s Motion for

22

Attorney’s Fees. The parties’ request is DENIED. If Defendant files a Motion for Attorney’s

23

Fees, the motion must address both whether Defendant is entitled to attorney’s fees and what the

24

amount of the fees should be.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

Dated: December 28, 2012

27
28

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

1
Case No.: 12-CV-02904-LHK
ORDER RE: STIPULATION RE: BIFURCATED PROCEDURE FOR MOTION BY SAN JOSE POLICE
OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION FOR DETERMINATION OF ENTITLEMENT OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES