Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00343/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-00343-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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 This motion was determined to be suitable for decision without *

oral argument. L.R. 78-230(h). 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CRIME, JUSTICE & AMERICA, INC., a )

California Corporation; and RAY ) 2:08-cv-343-GEB-EFB

HRDLICKA, an individual, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) ORDER*

)

PERRY L. RENIFF, in his official )

capacity of Sheriff of the County )

of Butte, California, )

)

Defendant. )

)

On April 14, 2008, Plaintiffs requested to continue the

hearing date on Defendant’s pending motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’

complaint to May 19, 2008. Defendant’s motion was set for hearing on

April 21, 2008.

Plaintiffs argue the continuance should be granted since (1)

Plaintiffs’ counsel wrongly calendared the due date for filing

Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendant’s dismissal motion, and (2)

Plaintiffs’ counsel is unable to attend the hearing on April 21, 2008

Case 2:08-cv-00343-TLN-EFB Document 18 Filed 04/17/08 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

because he is to begin another trial on that date. (Decl. of Spencer

D. Freeman in Supp. of Pls.’ Request to Continue ¶¶ 6, 8, 10-11.) 

Plaintiffs’ counsel declares that upon learning of his inability to

attend the April 21, 2008 hearing, he attempted to obtain a

stipulation from Defendant to continue the hearing date to May 5, 2008

(the next available hearing date); Defendant’s counsel refused because 

he is unavailable on that date. (Id. ¶¶ 11-12.) Defendant also

refused to stipulate to moving the hearing to May 19, 2008 (the

subsequent hearing date) because that date is too far in the future

for his client to wait. (Id.)

Under Local Rule 78-230(g), “[r]equests for continuances of

hearings on the motion calendar . . . shall be made . . . at least

five court days prior to the scheduled hearing date.” Plaintiffs’

request was timely under this rule. Since Plaintiffs’ counsel is

unavailable on April 21, 2008 and Defendant’s counsel is unavailable

on May 5, 2008, the hearing on Defendant’s dismissal motion is

continued to May 19, 2008, at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 17, 2008

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:08-cv-00343-TLN-EFB Document 18 Filed 04/17/08 Page 2 of 2