Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02261/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02261-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FREDERICK SCHIFF,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

et al.,

Defendants. ___________________________________

NARDA GILLESPIE et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

et al.,

Defendants. ___________________________________

MARK OSUNA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-03-4345 MMC

No. C-04-2261 MMC

No. C-04-2262 MMC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ RULE

56(F) REQUEST TO CONTINUE

HEARING ON DEFENDANT FRED LAU’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

ADJUDICATION

Case 3:04-cv-02261-MMC Document 76 Filed 10/18/05 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

2

Before the Court is the motion for summary adjudication on the issue of qualified

immunity, filed September 1, 2005 by defendant Fred Lau (“Lau”), a former San Francisco

Chief of Police. The motion is scheduled to be heard October 28, 2005. In plaintiffs’ joint

opposition to the motion, they seek a continuance of the hearing, pursuant to Rule 56(f) of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In particular, plaintiffs state they need additional time

to depose current San Francisco Chief of Police Heather Fong, former San Francisco 

Chief of Police Alex Fagan (“Fagan”), and certain unnamed members of the Police Officers

Association (“POA”) and Officers For Justice (“OFJ”), in order to further explore and, if

available, obtain admissible evidence relating to deposition testimony recently obtained

from Captain Rick Bruce (“Bruce”) that Fagan told him Lau had made a deal with the POA

and OFJ by which African-American candidates for Lieutenant would be promoted before

non-African-American candidates. Specifically, Captain Bruce testified that Fagan told him

that Lau, the POA, and the OFJ had “agreed that the first 25 appointments would be . . .

made in rank order, so long as once the band opened up, all of the African-American

candidates were appointed at the front of the band.” (See Bruce Dep. at 25:9-15 (attached

to Plaintiffs’ Joint Opp.)). Bruce also testified it was his understanding that the number of

rank order appointments “was negotiated with input from statistical experts,” taking into

account the number of African-American candidates that would be included in the band

from which the remainder of the appointments would be made. (See id. at 29:21-32:5.)

For good cause shown, plaintiffs’ request for a Rule 56(f) continuance is hereby

GRANTED, and the hearing scheduled for October 28, 2005 is hereby VACATED. The

parties shall meet and confer within seven days of the date of this order to schedule the

necessary depositions and to attempt to agree on a briefing and hearing schedule. No later

than ten days from the date of this order, the parties shall file (1) a stipulated deposition

schedule, and either (2) a stipulated proposed schedule for filing, briefing, and hearing an

amended motion for summary adjudication, or (3) a stipulated proposed schedule for filing

amended opposition and reply briefs in response to the currently-filed

Case 3:04-cv-02261-MMC Document 76 Filed 10/18/05 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

3

motion, and for the hearing thereon.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 18, 2005 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:04-cv-02261-MMC Document 76 Filed 10/18/05 Page 3 of 3