Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_88-cv-00634/USCOURTS-caed-1_88-cv-00634-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:2671 Federal Tort Claims 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FIREBAUGH CANAL WATER DISTRICT,

etc., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et

al.,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:88-cv-0634 OWW

consolidated with

1:92-cv-5554 OWW 

partially consolidated with

1:91-cv-0048 OWW 

ORDER AFTER SCHEDULING

CONFERENCE 

Further Scheduling

Conference: 1/14/09 8:15

Ctrm. 3

I. Date of Scheduling Conference.

July 18, 2008.

II. Appearances of Counsel.

Minasian, Spruance, Meith, Soares & Sexton by Paul R.

Minasian, Esq., appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs, Firebaugh Canal

Water District and Central California Irrigation District.

Stephen M. MacFarlane, Esq., appeared on behalf of the

Federal Defendants.

Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann & Girard by Daniel J.

O’Hanlon, Esq., appeared on behalf of Intervenor, Westlands Water

District. 

Case 1:88-cv-00634-JLT-SKO Document 731 Filed 07/28/08 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

Lisa & Lisa by Diane Van Atta Rathmann, Esq., appeared on

behalf of the Panoche Drainage District.

Griswold LaSalle Cobb Dowd and Gin by Raymond L. Carlson,

Esq., appeared on behalf of Broadview Water District and San Luis

Water District. 

Altshuler Berzon LLP by Hamilton Candee, Esq., appeared on

behalf of Intervenors, Natural Resources Defense Council and the

Bay Institute.

Laurens H. Silver, Esq., appeared on behalf of the

California Environmental Law Project. 

III. Status of Case.

1. The parties reported on negotiations conducted through

Senator Feinstein’s office and stakeholder efforts to effectuate

a non-judicial resolution. Plaintiffs also reported that an

extension regarding regulatory approval should be forthcoming. 

All parties agreed that it would be in the best interests of the

parties, the interests of justice, and to conserve judicial

resources, economy and expedition, that the conference be

continued for a further hearing.

2. The parties agreed that the only issues that are

presently viable are the tort claims brought by Plaintiffs under

state law. A second claim against higher elevation land owners

for trespass, nuisance, and related harms also remains to be

decided. 

3. A scheduling conference in this case shall be held 

///

///

///

Case 1:88-cv-00634-JLT-SKO Document 731 Filed 07/28/08 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

January 14, 2009, at 8:15 a.m. The parties may appear

telephonically. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 25, 2008 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:88-cv-00634-JLT-SKO Document 731 Filed 07/28/08 Page 3 of 3