Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-04570/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-04570-0/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

1

Stipulation to Extend Time and [Proposed] Order 14-CV-04570 BLF

ORRY P. KORB, County Counsel (S.B. #114399)

ARYN PAIGE HARRIS, Deputy County Counsel (S.B. #208590)

MICHAEL C. SERVERIAN, Deputy County Counsel (S.B. #133203)

OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL

70 West Hedding Street, East Wing, Ninth Floor

San Jose, California 95110-1770

Telephone: (408) 299-5900

Facsimile: (408) 292-7240

Attorneys for Defendants

COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA AND DEPUTY

JENNIFER GALAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

(SAN JOSE)

ESTATE OF ANDREA NAHARRO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, et al..,

Defendants.

No. 14-CV-04570 BLF (PSG)

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING

DATE AND EXTEND TIME TO FILE

PLEADINGS; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules for the United States District Court for the Northern District of

California, Rule 6-2, the parties hereby stipulate to extend time for the filing of Plaintiffs’ opposition

to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint and any reply in support of the

Motions. The Motion was filed on April 6, 2015, and the opposition is currently due April 20, 2015.

Plaintiffs have indicated that they would like to move the July 19, 2015 hearing date so as to allow

adequate time for the Supreme Court to issue its decision in City & Cnty. of San Francisco, Cal. v.

Sheehan, 135 S. Ct. 702 (2014).

In this case, Deputy Sheriff Jennifer Galan shot and killed Andrea Naharro in the line of

duty. The reason for this request to extend the briefing schedule and continue the hearing date is that

Defendants’ motion to dismiss seeks dismissal of Plaintiff’s third claim alleging a violation of Title

II of the American with Disabilities Act. In Sheehan v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 743 F.3d

1211, 1231 (9th Cir. 2014), the Ninth Circuit applied the ADA to a situation involving a police

encounter with a mentally-ill woman before the arrest was complete where the situation had defused

Case 5:14-cv-04570-BLF Document 41 Filed 04/16/15 Page 1 of 2
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

Stipulation to Extend Time and [Proposed] Order 14-CV-04570 BLF

sufficiently at the time of the use of force. Other circuits have refused to apply Title II of the ADA

to arrest. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and the matter has been briefed and argued. City &

Cnty. of San Francisco, Cal. v. Sheehan, 135 S. Ct. 702 (2014). A decision from the Supreme Court

is expected on or before June 30, 2015. The result of the decision may result in guidance as to the

parameters of an ADA claim in the circumstances of this case.

By this stipulation, the parties seek to extend the hearing date to September 3, 2015. In

order to incorporate the impact of Sheehan, the parties also seek to extend the deadline for filing the

opposition to July 21, 2015, and the deadline for filing the reply to August 11, 2015.

SO STIPULATED.

Dated: April 14, 2015

 By: /s/

 KAREN L. SNELL

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

 ESTATE OF ANDREA NAHARRO,

 STACY BARNARD and STEVEN

BARNARD

I hereby attest that I have on file the holograph signature for the signature indicated by a

“conformed” signature (/s/) within this e-filed document.

Dated: April 14, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

ORRY P. KORB

County Counsel

By: /s/

ARYN PAIGE HARRIS

Deputy County Counsel

Attorneys for Defendants

COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA and

DEPUTY JENNIFER GALAN

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ________________________ _____________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

1097135

$SULO

Case 5:14-cv-04570-BLF Document 41 Filed 04/16/15 Page 2 of 2