Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02292/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02292-29/pdf.json

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

---

Perry v. Schwartzenegger et al, Case No. CV 09 2292

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 1

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

RICHARD E. WINNIE [68048]

County Counsel 

CLAUDE F. KOLM [83517]

Deputy County Counsel

MANUEL F. MARTINEZ [245113]

Associate County Counsel

Office of County Counsel

County of Alameda

1221 Oak Street, Suite 450

Oakland, California 94612

Telephone: (510) 272-6700

Attorneys for PATRICK O’CONNELL, Clerk-Recorder of the County of Alameda

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

KRISTIN M. PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER, 

PAUL R. KATAMI, and JEFFREY J. 

ZARRILLO,

Plaintiffs,

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

Plaintiffs-Interveners,

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his 

official capacity as Governor of California; 

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR. in his official 

capacity as Attorney General of California; 

MARK B. HORTON, in his official capacity 

as Director of the California Department of 

Public Health and State Registrar of Vital 

Statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her official 

capacity as Deputy Director of Health 

Information and Strategic Planning for the 

California Department of Public Health; 

PATRICK O’CONNELL in his official 

capacity as Clerk-Recorder for the County 

of Alameda; and DEAN C. LOGAN, in his 

official capacity as RegistrarRecorder/County Clerk for the County of 

Los Angeles, 

Defendants,

Case No.: CV 09 2292 VRW

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING 

ATTENDANCE OF TRIAL BY 

DEFENDANT PATRICK 

O’CONNELL CLERK-RECORDER 

OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

Trial Date: January 11, 2010

Courtroom: No. 6, 17th Floor

United States District Chief Judge

Vaughn R. Walker

Action Filed: May 27, 2009

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 455 Filed 01/14/10 Page 1 of 6
Perry v. Schwartzenegger et al, Case No. CV 09 2292

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 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

DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, GAIL J. 

KNIGHT, MARTIN F. GUTIERREZ, 

HAK-SHING WILLIAM TAM, MARK A. 

JANSSON and 

PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM – YES ON 8, 

A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA RENEWAL,

as official proponents of Proposition 8, 

Defendants-Interveners.

WHEREAS, Patrick O’Connell Clerk-Recorder of the County of Alameda 

(“Alameda County Clerk-Recorder”), has stated in his trial memorandum filed on 

December 4, 2009 (Document Nos. 277), that he takes no position on the merits of the

case as to the validity of Proposition 8. 

WHEREAS, in the same trial memorandum, Defendant Patrick O’Connell ClerkRecorder of the County of Alameda further indicated that he does not intend on 

presenting any evidence or argument on the merits, but reserves the right to provide a 

defense as to any specific wrongdoing as to him. 

NOW THEREFORE, the parties, through their respective counsel of record, do 

hereby stipulate and agree, and ask the Court to enter an order pursuant to Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 16 as follows:

1. The attendance at trial by counsel of record for Defendant 

Patrick O’Connell Clerk-Recorder of the County of Alameda will not be necessary, but 

Defendant Patrick O’Connell Clerk-Recorder of the County of Alameda’s counsel may 

attend the hearing, as budgetary restraints permit, for selected arguments.

2. Defendant Patrick O’Connell Clerk-Recorder of the County of Alameda will 

continue to be served in the normal practice throughout the proceedings. 

///

///

///

///

///

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 455 Filed 01/14/10 Page 2 of 6
Perry v. Schwartzenegger et al, Case No. CV 09 2292

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 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

3. Defendant Patrick O’Connell Clerk-Recorder of the County of Alameda will

be bound by the final judgment of the Court in this matter.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: 1/5/10 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL

By: /s/ Judy W. Whitehurst

Judy W. Whitehurst

Principal Deputy County Counsel

Attorneys for DEAN C. LOGAN, 

LOS ANGELES REGISTARREORDER/COUNTY CLERK

DATED: 1/5/10 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

By: /s/ Christopher D. Dusseault

Christopher D. Dusseault

Attorneys for Plaintiffs KRISTIN M. 

PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER, PAUL T. 

KATAMI, and FEFFREY J. ZARRILLO

DATED: 1/6/10 OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY

By: /s/ Terese M. Stewart

Terese M. Stewart

Chief Deputy City Attorney

Attorneys Plaintiff-Intervenor CITY AND 

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

DATED: 1/7/10 LAW OFFICE OF TERRY L. THOMPSON

By: /s/ Terry L. Thompson

Terry L. Thompson

Attorney for Defendant-Intervener 

HAK-SHING WILLIAM TAM

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 455 Filed 01/14/10 Page 3 of 6
Perry v. Schwartzenegger et al, Case No. CV 09 2292

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 4

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

DATED: 1/7/10 COOPER AND KIRK, PLLC

By: /s/ David H. Thompson

David H. Thompson

Attorneys for Defendant-Intervenors 

PROPOSITION 8 OFFICIAL PROPONENTS; 

and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM – YES ON 8, 

A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA RENEWAL

DATED: 1/5/10 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

By: /s/ Tamar Pacher

Tamar Pachter

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendant ATTORNEY 

GENERAL EDMUND G. BROWN, JR. 

DATED: 1/5/10 MENNEMEIIER, GLASSMAN & STROUD LLP

By: /s/ Andrew W. Stroud

Andrew W. Stroud

Attorneys for Defendants ARNOLD 

SCHWARZNEGGER, MARK B. HORTON and 

LINETTE SCOTT (the “Administration 

Defendants”)

DATED: 1/5/10 RICHARD E. WINNIE, County Counsel in and 

for the County of Alameda, State of California

By: /s/ Claude F. Kolm

Claude F. Kolm

Deputy County Counsel

Attorneys for Defendant 

PATRICK O’CONNELL, Clerk-Recorder for the 

County of Alameda

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 455 Filed 01/14/10 Page 4 of 6
Perry v. Schwartzenegger et al, Case No. CV 09 2292

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 5

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

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ___________________ _____________________________________

HONORABLE VAUGHN R. WALKER

Chief Judge of the United States District Court,

Northern District of California

January 13, 2010 

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Vaughn R Walker

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 455 Filed 01/14/10 Page 5 of 6
Perry v. Schwartzenegger et al, Case No. CV 09 2292

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 6

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

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 45

Pursuant to General Order No. 45 of the Northern District of California, I attest 

that concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from each of the other 

signatories to this document.

RICHARD E. WINNIE, County Counsel in and 

for the County of Alameda, State of California

By: /s/ Manuel F. Martinez

Manuel F. Martinez

Associate County Counsel

Attorneys for Defendant 

PATRICK O’CONNELL, Clerk-Recorder for the 

County of Alameda

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 455 Filed 01/14/10 Page 6 of 6