Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00909/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00909-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO 

CHANGE TIME 

1 n:\lit\li2006\041145\00004973.doc 

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

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669

City Attorney 

JOANNE HOEPER, State Bar #114961

Chief Trial Deputy 

ELIZABETH L. DEELEY, State Bar #230798 

Deputy City Attorney 

Fox Plaza 

1390 Market Street, 6th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94102-5408 

Telephone: (415) 554-3982 

Facsimile: (415) 554-3837 

E-Mail: elizabeth.deeley@sfgov.org 

Attorneys for Defendant 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DENNIS ROZADILLA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

SHERIFF MICHAEL HENNESSEY, et 

al., 

 Defendants. 

Case No. c04-0909 MEJ 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER TO CHANGE TIME FOR 

EXPERT DISCLOSURES AND 

EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF 

U.S.D.C. Northern District 

L.R. 6-3 

Date Action Filed: July 9, 2004 

Trial Date: July 17, 2007 

 On December 18, 2006, the Court granted the parties' first request to change the deadlines for 

discovery and dispositive motions. The Court's order set a January 31, 2007 deadline for expert 

disclosures, February 15, 2007 deadline for rebuttal expert disclosures and March 9 as the cutoff for 

all discovery, including experts. 

 The parties, through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate to and respectfully request 

that the Court change the times for expert disclosures from January 31, 2007 to March 15, 2007 and 

rebuttal expert disclosures from February 15, 2007 to March 30, 2007. Currently the cut off for all 

Rozadilla v. Hennessey, No. C04-0909 MEJ

Case 3:04-cv-00909-MEJ Document 75 Filed 01/29/07 Page 1 of 3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO 

CHANGE TIME 

2 n:\lit\li2006\041145\00004973.doc 

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

discovery is March 9, 2007. The parties also stipulate to and request that the Court set the date for 

the cutoff of discovery as it pertains to experts only for April 20, 2007. These changes should not 

effect the trial date. 

 The parties request these changes for the following reasons. First, through the course of 

discovery, the parties discovered that there are several medical providers for plaintiff whose records 

have not been produced. Plaintiff does not have those records, so defendant City and County of San 

Francisco ("defendant") issued third party subpoenas to obtain them. While defendant expected to 

receive documents in response to those subpoenas by the third week in January, many of the medical 

providers subpoenaed have not yet produced the requested documents. The parties anticipate that 

their experts will rely on these additional medical records. Thus, the parties require additional time to 

obtain these records before completing expert disclosures. 

 Second, the parties seeks to change the date for expert disclosures so that defendant may 

obtain an independent psychological examination ("IPE") of plaintiff. Plaintiff has placed his 

psychological condition in controversy and, thus, defendant requested last November that plaintiff 

stipulate to an IPE. Plaintiff's counsel agreed to discuss such a stipulation with plaintiff, or 

alternatively seek an order dismissing claims and requests for damages based on plaintiff's 

psychological condition. However, in the meantime, Plaintiff''s counsel learned, and notified 

defendant's counsel, that plaintiff was unavailable to answer defendant's interrogatory requests or to 

discuss his claims based on his psychological condition because plaintiff's partner was gravely ill, and 

plaintiff was completely consumed with caring for her. Based on assurances from plaintiff's counsel 

that plaintiff intended to respond to defendant's discovery requests and to either stipulate to an IPE or 

seek an order dismissing his claims based on his psychological condition (and as a courtesy to 

plaintiff who was apparently dealing with an illness of a loved one), defendant's counsel did not at 

that time seek an order to compel an IPE or discovery responses. Defendant's counsel learned today 

that plaintiff has just become available and intends to address these issues sometime next week. In 

the meantime, however, the parties seek to change the time for expert disclosures, currently set for 

Rozadilla v. Hennessey, No. C04-0909 MEJ

Case 3:04-cv-00909-MEJ Document 75 Filed 01/29/07 Page 2 of 3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO 

CHANGE TIME 

3 n:\lit\li2006\041145\00004973.doc 

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

January 31, 2007, for this additional reason that defendant seeks to have an IPE on plaintiff prior to 

providing such disclosures. 

 For these reasons, the parties respectfully requests that the Court change the current 

scheduling order to reflect the following changes: 

• Change the expert disclosure deadline from January 31, 2007 to March 15, 2007 

• Change rebuttal expert disclosures from February 15, 2007 to March 30, 2007 

• Change expert discovery cutoff from March 9, 2007 to April 20, 2007. 

 

SO STIPULATED 

Dated: January 25, 2007 

DENNIS J. HERRERA 

City Attorney 

JOANNE HOEPER 

Chief Trial Deputy 

ELIZABETH L. DEELEY 

Deputy City Attorney 

By: /s/ 

ELIZABETH L. DEELEY 

Attorneys for Defendant 

CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

Dated: January 25, 2007 THE LAW OFFICE OF DENNIS CUNNINGHAM 

By: /s/ 

DENNIS CUNNINGHAM 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 DENNIS ROZADILLA 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 

Dated:______________________ __________________________________ 

 HONORABLE MARIA-ELENA JAMES 

 United States District Judge 

Rozadilla v. Hennessey, No. C04-0909 MEJ

January 29, 2007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

GRANTED

Judge Maria-Elena James

Case 3:04-cv-00909-MEJ Document 75 Filed 01/29/07 Page 3 of 3