Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-05180/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-05180-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUANITA STOCKWELL, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. C 08-5180 PJH

v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

SUPPLEMENT THE PLEADINGS AND

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN VACATING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING

FRANCISCO, ORDER

Defendant.

_______________________________/

The motion of plaintiffs Juanita Stockwell, et al. (“plaintiffs”) for an order granting

leave to supplement the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 came on

for hearing on April 7, 2010. Plaintiffs appeared by their counsel Ryan Hicks, and

defendant City and County of San Francisco appeared by its counsel Jonathan Rolnick. 

Having carefully reviewed the parties’ papers and considered the arguments of counsel and

the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court hereby grants plaintiffs

motion, for the reasons stated at the hearing, and summarized as follows.

Because the court finds it unnecessary for plaintiff to file a second case addressing a

matter that is related to the pending matter, even if it does not necessarily arise out of the

identical conduct of defendant, the court hereby GRANTS plaintiffs’ motion to supplement

the first amended complaint. However, before the plaintiffs can file the proposed

supplemental complaint, they must delete the erroneous reference to San Francisco Police

Chief Heather Fong in paragraph 15, as plaintiffs’ counsel confirmed at the hearing that

plaintiffs are suing neither former Chief Fong nor current Chief Gascon.

In order to address defendant’s concerns about the impact of both the supplemental

claims and class certification on the scope of discovery, the court VACATES the pretrial

Case 4:08-cv-05180-PJH Document 53 Filed 04/07/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

schedule. After the court rules on the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, the parties

shall meet and confer and submit a stipulation to the court regarding further discovery

dates, or the parties may request that a further case management conference be

scheduled. Plaintiffs must file their motion for class certification within 30 days of the date

of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 7, 2010 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:08-cv-05180-PJH Document 53 Filed 04/07/10 Page 2 of 2