Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05964/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05964-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

Order After Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Hearing on County’s MSJ

1

B.C. BARMANN, SR., COUNTY COUNSEL

COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

By: Andrew C. Thomson, Deputy (SBN 149057)

By: Jennifer L. Thurston, Deputy (SBN 191821)

Kern County Administrative Center

1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor

Bakersfield, California 93301

Telephone: 661-868-3800

Facsimile: 661-868-3805

Attorneys for Defendants, County of Kern

Kern County Sheriff’s Department, Carl Sparks, 

Deputy Dixon, Eric Fennell, Edward Jagels

and John Brownlee

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KENNETH FAULKNER,

Plaintiffs,

v.

COUNTY OF KERN, public entity;

KERN COUNTY SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT, public entity; CARL

SPARKS, (former) Sheriff Kern County,

public entity; Sheriff’s Deputy Dixon,

individually and officially; Sheriff’s

Deputy Eric Fennell, individually and

officially; Edward Jagels, Kern County

District Attorney, individually and

officially, John Brownlee, Deputy District

Attorney, individually and officially;

Patricia Poeschel, individually and

officially; Mark Arnold, Kern County

Public Defender, individually and

officially; Leslie Greer, Deputy Public

Defender, individually and officially; Bill

Lockyear, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, individually

and officially; R. Todd Marshall, Deputy

Attorney General, individually and

officially; and DOES 1-10, Inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. CIV-F-04-5964 OWW TAG

ORDER AFTER HEARING ON

PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE APPLICATION

FOR AN ORDER CONTINUING

COUNTY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

Case 1:04-cv-05964-OWW -TAG Document 51 Filed 12/22/05 Page 1 of 3
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

Order After Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Hearing on County’s MSJ

2

Plaintiff’s ex parte application for an order continuing the hearing on the motion for

summary judgment or summary adjudication for defendants County of Kern, Kern County

Sheriff’s Department, Carl Sparks, Deputy Dixon, Eric Fennell, Edward Jagels and John

Brownlee (“County”) was heard on December 16, 2005 at 3:30 p.m. by telephonic

conference before the Honorable Judge Oliver W. Wanger, presiding.

Plaintiff, Kenneth Faulkner, was represented by Ellen Hammill Ellison. County was

represented by B.C. Barmann Sr., County Counsel, Jennifer L. Thurston, Deputy,

appearing. 

Having considered the arguments set forth in the papers submitted by the parties and

having heard and considered the arguments of counsel, the Court determines as follows:

1. The hearing on County’s motion for summary judgment or summary

adjudication and any other Rule 56 motions filed by Bill Lockyer and R. Todd Marshall (“the

State defendants”) or by plaintiff will be heard on February 27, 2006 at 10:00 a.m. in

Courtroom 2.

The County’s Motion

2. Plaintiff’s Opposition to County’s motion must be filed on or before January 23,

2006.

3. County’s Reply to plaintiff’s Opposition to County’s motion for summary

judgment or summary adjudication must be filed on or before February 10, 2006.

Plaintiff’s Motion

4. Any Rule 56 motion filed by plaintiff must be filed on or before January 23,

2006.

5. County’s and the State defendants’ Opposition to any Rule 56 motion filed by

plaintiff must be filed on or before February 10, 2006.

6. Plaintiff’s Reply to Opposition to any Rule 56 motion filed by plaintiff must be

filed on or before February 17, 2006.

///

Case 1:04-cv-05964-OWW -TAG Document 51 Filed 12/22/05 Page 2 of 3
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

Order After Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Hearing on County’s MSJ

3

The State Defendants’ Motion

7. Any Rule 56 motion filed by the State defendants must be filed on or before

January 23, 2006.

8. Plaintiff’s Opposition to any Rule 56 motion filed by the State defendants must

be filed on or before February 10, 2006.

9. The State defendants’ Reply to the Opposition by plaintiff to any Rule 56

motion filed by the State defendants must be filed on or before February 17, 2006.

Modification of Scheduling Conference Order

10. Given the change in hearing date for County’s motion for summary judgment

or summary adjudication, the Court orders the Scheduling Conference Order to be modified

to allow County to take the deposition of plaintiff’s retained expert, Dr. Russell, if necessary,

at a time convenient to the parties after the ruling on the motions for summary judgment but

before trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated 12/21/05

/s/Oliver W. Wanger

Oliver W. Wanger, Judge

Case 1:04-cv-05964-OWW -TAG Document 51 Filed 12/22/05 Page 3 of 3