Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00538/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00538-12/pdf.json

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

---

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order

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

Anthony Boskovich, No. 121198

Law Offices of Anthony Boskovich

28 N. First Street, Suite 600

San Jose, California 95113

408-286-5150

Peter C. Grenier (pro hac vice)

Stan M. Doerrer (pro hac vice)

Grenier Law Group PLLC

1400 L St. NW, Suite 420

Washington, DC 20005-35509 

Tel: 202-768-9600

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

RICHARD PHILLIPS, in his capacity as 

administrator of the ESTATE OF TROY 

PHILLIPS; TIFFANY PHILLIPS,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

COUNTY OF FRESNO, et al.

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:13-cv-00538-AWI-BAM

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 

SUBSTITUTE AND DISMISS 

DEFENDANTS

Doc. # 99

This case arises out of the alleged wrongful death of pre-trial detainee Troy Phillips at the Fresno 

County Jail. When the initial Complaint was filed, Plaintiffs were aware of the identities of some, but not 

all, of the officer Defendants involved in the events leading up to Mr. Phillips’ death. See First Amended 

Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights, Dkt. 39 (“Complaint”). Because Plaintiffs knew that other 

officers were likely involved, however, but that the identities of these officers would remain unknown 

until discovery had taken place, Plaintiffs named these unknown officers as “John Doe and Richard Doe” 

Case 1:13-cv-00538-AWI-BAM Document 100 Filed 01/04/16 Page 1 of 4
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

in the Complaint, so that their names could be substituted as they became available through discovery. 

See Complaint, ¶¶ 14-15.

As information became available during discovery, Plaintiff learned the identity of other potential 

Defendants, and took steps to effectuate substitution and add Defendants. By January 15, 2015, Counsel 

for Plaintiffs requested that opposing counsel stipulate to this substitution of Officer Diaz in place of a 

John Doe and Richard Doe defendant, and Defendant did not so agree. On March 2, 2015, Plaintiff 

moved to substitute Classification Officer Diaz as a Doe Defendant, offering facts in support of this 

substitution. See Dkt. 73. Defendants opposed this motion on March 5, 2015. See Dkt. 77. On April 15, 

2015, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion and ordered that Plaintiffs file a Second Amended Complaint 

within 7 days of the order, and serve Classification Officer Diaz with the Second Amended Complaint no 

later than May 15, 2015. See Dkt. 84. Plaintiffs complied with this order and filed the Second Amended 

Complaint on April 22, 2015. See Dkt. 85. Plaintiffs served the Second Amended Complaint on 

Defendant Diaz through her counsel. 

Subsequently, information obtained in discovery identified Correctional Officer Jack Rocha as an 

additional person Plaintiffs wished to substitute as a Defendant for a John Doe or Richard Roe. In an 

effort to avoid further piecemeal changes to the complaint and to conserve the resources of the Court and 

the parties, Plaintiffs reached an agreement with Defense on the June 29, 2015, conference call, whereby 

after completion of the Rule 30(b)(6) depositions, a timeframe would be discussed by which Plaintiff 

could make any further amendments. See Plaintiffs July 6, 2015, letter and Defendants’ July 8, 2015, 

letter. Rule 30(b)(6) depositions occurred in this case on July 13, 2015 (Lt. Duran, Part 1), September 9, 

2015 (Lt. Duran, Part 2) and October 21, 2015 (David Pomaville). Plaintiffs deposed Officer Rocha on 

November 16, 2015. Officer Jack Rocha was a classification officer at the Fresno County Jail in 2012, 

and he housed Jose Cuevas in the cell with Troy Phillips, where the attack ultimately occurred. In an 

email exchange two days after the deposition, on November 18, 2015, the parties agreed to Plaintiffs’ 

suggestion to substitute Correctional Officer Jack Rocha as a Defendant and drop other 

Defendants/claims, via a stipulation, rather than by filing a Third Amended Complaint. The deadline for 

Non-Expert discovery was December 18, 2015. See Dkt. 70.

Case 1:13-cv-00538-AWI-BAM Document 100 Filed 01/04/16 Page 2 of 4
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

Given this,

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties that:

1. Correctional Officer Jack Rocha is hereby substituted as a Defendant in this case, in place 

of one of the “John Doe and Richard Doe” defendants as initially named in the complaint in this matter.

2. Defendant Correctional Officer L. Her, Correctional Officer K. Yang, and Correctional 

Officer Castro are hereby dismissed from this action.

3. All claims relating to jail staff’s response to the subject incident are hereby dismissed 

from this action.

Dated: December 30, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

Anthony Boskovich

Anthony Boskovich

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: December 30, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

James Weakley

James Weakley

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 1:13-cv-00538-AWI-BAM Document 100 Filed 01/04/16 Page 3 of 4
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

ORDER

Upon stipulation of the parties, and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Correctional Officer Jack Rocha is hereby substituted as a Defendant in this case, in place 

of one of the “John Doe and Richard Doe” defendants as initially named in the complaint in this matter.

2. Defendant Correctional Officer L. Her, Correctional Officer K. Yang, and Correctional 

Officer Castro are hereby dismissed from this action.

3. All claims relating to jail staff’s response to the subject incident are dismissed from this 

action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 4, 2016 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00538-AWI-BAM Document 100 Filed 01/04/16 Page 4 of 4