Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00488/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00488-3/pdf.json

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

---

COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

CENTER

575 ADMINISTRATION DRIVE,

ROOM 105A

SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA 95403

TELEPHONE: (707) 565-2421

FACSIMILE: (707) 565-2624

OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL

STEVEN M. WOODSIDE

County Counsel

ANNE L. KECK

DEPUTY COUNTY COUNSEL

AKECK@SONOMA-COUNTY.ORG

February 15, 2008

Via e-filing and facsimile

Chief Magistrate Judge James Larson 

United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Courtroom F 

San Francisco, CA 94102

Re: George G. Goulart v. County of Sonoma, et al.,

Northern Dist. Case No. C-07-0488,

DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE

CURRENTLY SET FOR FEBRUARY 20, 2008, 10:30 A.M.

Dear Judge Larson:

I am counsel of record for Defendants the County of Sonoma and Sheriff Bill

Cogbill in the above-referenced action. As previously reported to the Court via letter on

July 24, 2007, the sole Plaintiff in this case, George G. Goulart, has passed away. Two

previously-set case management conferences have been continued at the request of

counsel for the parties: the current case management conference is currently set for

February 20, 2008, at 10:30 a.m. As stated in the parties’ joint letter dated September 27,

2007, the latter continuance was requested for the purpose of providing time for counsel

for Plaintiff, Frear Stephen Schmid, to attempt to obtain the names and addresses of

Plaintiffs’ successors in interest, as well as to allow Defendants to serve on them a

Statement of the Fact of Death in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25

(“Rule 25").

During the intervening months, Mr. Schmid has repeatedly informed me that he

intended to investigate and provide the names and addresses of Plaintiff’s successors in

interest to me, but that he simply had not yet been able to accomplish the task. Upon

receipt of Plaintiff’s Case Management Conference Statement filed today, I have learned

for the first time that Mr. Schmid is not able to provide the information promised.

Since notice to Plaintiff’s successors in interest is a necessary precondition to

dismissing the case under Rule 25, Defendants will now proceed to investigate their

names and addresses on their own. Defendants request to be provided with an additional

Case 3:07-cv-00488-JL Document 20 Filed 02/19/08 Page 1 of 2
Hon. J. Larson

February 15, 2008

Page 2

30 days to complete such investigation, 30 days in which to complete service of the

Statement of the Fact of Death, and a further extension to account for the required 90-day

period mandated by Rule 25.

For these reasons, I request that the Court continue the case management

conference, currently set for February 20, 2008, at 10:30 a.m., for a period of at least 150

days to permit Defendants to comply with Rule 25 and a successor in interest to move the

court to substitute into the case as a plaintiff or for the case to be dismissed.

I appreciate the Court’s time and attention to this matter. Should the Court require

additional information to consider this request, please let me know.

Very truly yours,

/s/Anne L. Keck

Anne L. Keck

Deputy County Counsel

Counsel for Defendants

cc: Frear Stephen Schmid

 Bonnie Freeman

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE IS CONTINUED TO JULY 23, 2008 @ 10:30 A.M.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge James Larson

Case 3:07-cv-00488-JL Document 20 Filed 02/19/08 Page 2 of 2