Garcia v. County of Santa Clara

Filing 18

ORDER re 16 Joint Case Management Statement. It is hereby ordered pursuant to the parties request that the Case Management Conference set for 4/29/2016 is continued to 7/1/2016 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 4th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Ronald M . Whyte. The parties have agreed to mediation and that the case will not be in a posture to effectively mediate the case until after the pending criminal matter is complete. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 4/19/2016. (amkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/19/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

ORRY P. KORB, County Counsel (S.B. #114399)
MELISSA R. KINIYALOCTS, Deputy County Counsel (S.B. #215814)
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
70 West Hedding Street, East Wing, Ninth Floor
San Jose, California 95110-1770
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
DAVID J. STOCK, ESQ. (S.B. #85655)
RANKIN, STOCK & HEABERLIN
96 N. Third Street, Suite 500
San Jose, California 95112
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
OFFICER PHILLIP ABECENDARIO

10

DAVID S. ROSENBAUM, ESQ. (S.B. #151506)
McDOWALL COTTER
2070 Pioneer Court
12 San Mateo, California 94403
Telephone: [phone]
11

13
14

Attorneys for Defendant
OFFICER TUAN LE

ROBERT R. POWELL, ESQ. (S.B. #159747)
SARAH E. MARINHO, ESQ. (SB #293690
16 LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT R. POWELL
925 West Hedding Street
17 San Jose, California 95126
Telephone: [phone]
15

18
19

Attorneys for Plaintiff
RUBEN GARCIA

20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

21
22

RUBEN GARCIA,

23
24
25
26

No. 16-CV-00012-RMW

Plaintiff,

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT
STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

v.

Date:
Time:
Crtrm.:
Judge:

COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA et al.,
Defendants.

27

April 29, 2016
10:30 a.m.
6, 4th Floor
Ronald M. Whyte

28

Joint Case Management Statement and [Proposed] Order

1

16-CV-00012-RMW

The parties to the above-entitled action submit this Joint Case Management Statement and

1
2

Proposed Order pursuant to the Standing Order for All Judges of the Northern District of California

3

and Civil Local Rule 16-9.

4

1.

Jurisdiction and Service

5

This action arises under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Jurisdiction is conferred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§

6

1331 and 1343. The County of Santa Clara has been served and filed an Answer. Defendants

7

Phillip Abecendario and Tuan Le have filed waivers of service of summons, and their deadline to

8

respond to the Complaint is May 2, 2016.
2.

9

Plaintiff’s Allegations and Pending Criminal Investigation

10

Plaintiff Ruben Garcia alleges that while he was an inmate at the County’s Main Jail,

11

Defendants Abecendario and Le, who are correctional officers, violated his constitutional rights by

12

allegedly using excessive force and denying him medical care in July 2015. Plaintiff alleges that the

13

County was on notice of a pattern of unconstitutional conduct by correctional officers and

14

demonstrated deliberate indifference to this alleged pattern and also allegedly failed to provide

15

adequate training to correctional officers. Defendants deny Plaintiffs’ allegations.
The parties believe that the Office of the District Attorney has an open criminal investigation

16
17

pertaining to the incidents alleged in the Complaint but has not brought charges.

18

3.

Legal Issues

19

Plaintiff brings claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of the Fourth,

20

Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments against the correctional-officer defendants and a Monell

21

claim against the County. Plaintiff also brings state-law claims for intentional infliction of

22

emotional distress, alleged violations of California Civil Code section 52.1, and breach of mandatory

23

duty.

24

4.

Motions

25

There are no pending motions. Given the early posture of the case, the parties are unable to

26

identify anticipated motions at this time.

27

//

28

//
Joint Case Management Statement and [Proposed] Order

2

16-CV-00012-RMW

1

5.

2

Plaintiffs anticipate amending the complaint to correctly spell the full and complete name of

3

Amendment of Pleadings

Mr. Phillip Abecendario, and include the first name of correctional officer Le.

4

6.

5

The parties have reviewed the Guidelines for the Discovery of Electronically Stored

6

Information (ESI), which were revised on December 1, 2015. The parties are aware of their

7

obligations to cooperate on issues relating to the preservation, collection, search, review, and

8

production of ESI and that the proportionality standard set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

9

26(b)(1) applies to discovery in this case. The parties agree to meet and confer as necessary to

10

Evidence Preservation

address any issues regarding ESI.

11

7.

12

The parties agree to serve their initial disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

13

Disclosures

26 by May 27, 2016.

14

8.

Discovery

15

Discovery has not yet begun. The parties agree that discovery may be impacted by the

16

pending criminal investigation pertaining to the incidents alleged in the Complaint. It is premature

17

at this time to set a discovery schedule given the uncertainty of the timing and outcome of the

18

criminal investigation.

19

9.

Class Action

20

This case is not a class action.

21

10.

22

There are no related cases.

23

11.

24

Plaintiff will be seeking emotional distress damages, compensation for pain and suffering,

Related Cases

Relief

25

past and future medical expenses associated with injuries sustained to his jaw/teeth with anticipated

26

future surgeries, and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial according to proof.

27

12.

Settlement and ADR

28

The parties have agreed to mediation and that the case will not be in a posture to effectively
Joint Case Management Statement and [Proposed] Order

3

16-CV-00012-RMW

1

mediate the case until after the pending criminal matter is complete.

2

13.

3

The County has not consented to proceed before a Magistrate Judge.

4

14.

5

The parties agree that this case is not suitable for reference to binding arbitration, a special

6

Consent to Magistrate Judge for All Purposes

Other References

master, or the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

7

15.

8

At this time the parties are not aware of any issues that can be narrowed by agreement or

9

Narrowing of Issues

motion.

10

16.

11

The parties agree that this case is not suitable for the Expedited Trial Procedure of General

12

Expedited Trial Procedure

Order No. 64.

13

17.

Scheduling

14

Given the pending criminal investigation and the uncertainty at this time of the timing and

15

outcome of that matter, the parties agree that it is premature to schedule dates for designation of

16

experts, discovery cutoff, hearing of dispositive motions, pretrial conference, and trial.

17

18.

18

This case will be tried to a jury, and the estimated length of trial at this time is two weeks.

19

19.

20

The County is exempt from filing a Certification of Interested Entities or Persons.

21

20.

22

All attorneys of record for the parties have reviewed the Guidelines for Professional Conduct

23

Trial

Disclosure of Non-party Interested Entities or Persons

Professional Conduct

for the Northern District of California.

24

21.

Other

25

Given the pending criminal investigation and the parties’ inability at this time to set a

26

discovery schedule and trial date, the parties respectfully request that the Court continue the Case

27

Management Conference for 60 days.

28

//
Joint Case Management Statement and [Proposed] Order

4

16-CV-00012-RMW

1
2

I hereby attest that I have on file all holographic signatures corresponding to any signatures
indicated by a conformed signature /S/ within this e-filed document.

3

ORRY P. KORB
County Counsel

4
5
6

Dated: April 14, 2016

By:

/S/
MELISSA R. KINIYALOCTS
Deputy County Counsel

7
8

.

Attorneys for Defendant
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

9
10

RANKIN, STOCK & HEABERLIN

11
12

Dated: April 14, 2016

By:

/S/
DAVID J. STOCK, ESQ.

13

.

Attorneys for Defendant
OFFICER PHILLIP ABECENDARIO

14
15

McDOWALL COTTER

16
17

Dated: April 14, 2016

By:

/S/
DAVID S. ROSENBAUM, ESQ

18

.

Attorneys for Defendant
OFFICER TUAN LE

19
20

LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT R. POWELL

21
22

Dated: April 14, 2016

By:

/S/
ROBERT R. POWELL, ESQ.

23

.

Attorneys for Plaintiff
RUBEN GARCIA

24
25
26
27
28

Joint Case Management Statement and [Proposed] Order

5

16-CV-00012-RMW

ORDER

1

The Court continues the Initial Case Management Conference to July 1, 2016. at
,

2
3
4

10:30 a.m.
4/19/2016
Dated: _______________

_______________________________
RONALD M. WHYTE
Senior District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1298854

Joint Case Management Statement and [Proposed] Order

6

16-CV-00012-RMW