Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01335/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01335-0/pdf.json

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

SALVADOR CARRILLO,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF COALINGA, CALIFORNIA,

AND TWO INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES AND

MEMBERS OF ITS POLICE

DEPARTMENT, TO WIT: SERGEANT

YARBOROUGH, OFFICER IRELAND,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NEW CASE NUMBER:

1:05-cv-1335 LJO

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER

AND ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE

TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Discovery Cut-Off: 12/29/06

Non-Dispositive Motion

Filing Deadline: 1/15/07

Dispositive Motion Filing

Deadline: 1/30/07

Settlement Conference Date:

1/11/07 10:00 Ctrm. 9

Pre-Trial Conference Date:

3/26/07 9:00 Ctrm. 8

Trial Date: 4/23/07 9:00

Ctrm. 8 (JT-5 days)

I. Date of Scheduling Conference.

March 24, 2006.

II. Appearances Of Counsel.

William A. Romaine, Esq., appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. 

Bacigalupi, Neufeld & Rowley by Craig M. Mortensen, Esq., 

appeared on behalf of Defendants. 

///

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 1 of 9
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

III. Summary of Pleadings. 

1. This is a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged

violations of Plaintiff’s civil rights by police officers and

their employer (City) for allegedly entering into Plaintiff’s

residence without a warrant or sufficient cause and depriving

Plaintiff of his security, causing emotional distress. Plaintiff

prays for monetary general and punitive damages. 

IV. Orders Re Amendments To Pleadings.

1. The parties do not anticipate filing any amendments to

the pleadings at this time. 

V. Factual Summary.

A. Admitted Facts Which Are Deemed Proven Without Further

Proceedings. 

1. Plaintiff Salvador Carrillo is a citizen of the

United States and at all times was a resident of the Eastern

District of California at the time of the events alleged in the

Complaint. 

2. City of Coalinga is a general law city and public

entity within the meaning of California law.

3. Sergeant Keith Yarborough is a duly employed and

acting Sergeant of the City of Coalinga Police Department and was

on duty at the time of the alleged incident, May 7, 2004. 

4. Officer Debra Ireland was a duly authorized and

acting Police Officer of the City of Coalinga on May 7, 2004, the

time of the alleged incident.

5. Both individual Defendants were at all times

acting within the course and scope of their public employment on

behalf of the Police Department of the City of Coalinga and under

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 2 of 9
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

color of state law. 

6. On May 7, 2004, Plaintiff owned a residence in the

City of Coalinga, California. 

7. On May 7, 2004, Officers Yarborough and Ireland

searched Plaintiff’s residence. 

8. Plaintiff was arrested on May 7, 2004.

9. The arrest of Plaintiff was without an issued

warrant of arrest.

B. Contested Facts.

1. All remaining facts are disputed.

VI. Legal Issues.

A. Uncontested.

1. Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 42

U.S.C. § 1983, et seq. 

2. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

3. As to supplemental claims, the parties agree that

the substantive law of the State of California provides the rule

of decision. 

B. Contested. 

1. All remaining legal issues are contested.

VII. Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction.

1. The parties have agreed that this case shall be

transferred to the Magistrate Judge for all purposes, including

trial. Therefore, the case number that should be typed on all

future pleadings in this case is as follows: 1:05-cv-1335 LJO.

VIII. Corporate Identification Statement.

1. Any nongovernmental corporate party to any action in

this court shall file a statement identifying all its parent

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 3 of 9
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

4

corporations and listing any entity that owns 10% or more of the

party's equity securities. A party shall file the statement with

its initial pleading filed in this court and shall supplement the

statement within a reasonable time of any change in the

information. 

IX. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date.

1. The parties are ordered to complete all discovery on

or before December 29, 2006.

2. The parties are directed to disclose all expert

witnesses, in writing, on or before October 2, 2006. Any

supplemental expert disclosures will be made on or before

November 1, 2006. The parties will comply with the provisions of

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) regarding their expert

designations. Local Rule 16-240(a) notwithstanding, the written

designation of experts shall be made pursuant to F. R. Civ. P.

Rule 26(a)(2), (A) and (B) and shall include all information

required thereunder. Failure to designate experts in compliance

with this order may result in the Court excluding the testimony

or other evidence offered through such experts that are not

disclosed pursuant to this order.

3. The provisions of F. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) shall 

apply to all discovery relating to experts and their opinions. 

Experts may be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and

opinions included in the designation. Failure to comply will

result in the imposition of sanctions. 

X. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule.

1. All Non-Dispositive Pre-Trial Motions, including any

discovery motions, will be filed on or before January 15, 2007,

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 4 of 9
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

5

and heard on February 16, 2007, at 9:00 a.m. before Magistrate

Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill in Courtroom 8. 

2. In scheduling such motions, the Magistrate

Judge may grant applications for an order shortening time

pursuant to Local Rule 142(d). However, if counsel does not

obtain an order shortening time, the notice of motion must comply

with Local Rule 251. 

3. All Dispositive Pre-Trial Motions are to be

filed no later than January 30, 2007, and will be heard on March

2, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. before the Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill,

United States Magistrate Judge, in Courtroom 8, 6th Floor. In

scheduling such motions, counsel shall comply with Local Rule

230. 

XI. Pre-Trial Conference Date.

1. March 26, 2007, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 8, 6th Floor,

before the Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill, United States

Magistrate Judge. 

2. The parties are ordered to file a Joint PreTrial Statement pursuant to Local Rule 281(a)(2). 

3. Counsel's attention is directed to Rules 281 

and 282 of the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District

of California, as to the obligations of counsel in preparing for

the pre-trial conference. The Court will insist upon strict

compliance with those rules.

XII. Trial Date.

1. April 23, 2007, at the hour of 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom

8, 6th Floor, before the Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill, United

States Magistrate Judge. 

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 5 of 9
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

6

2. This is a jury trial.

3. Counsels' Estimate Of Trial Time:

a. 5 days.

4. Counsels' attention is directed to Local Rules

of Practice for the Eastern District of California, Rule 285. 

XIII. Settlement Conference.

1. A Settlement Conference is scheduled for January 11,

2007, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 9 before the Honorable Dennis L.

Beck, United States Magistrate Judge. 

2. Unless otherwise permitted in advance by the

Court, the attorneys who will try the case shall appear at the

Settlement Conference with the parties and the person or persons

having full authority to negotiate and settle the case on any

terms at the conference. 

3. Permission for a party [not attorney] to attend

by telephone may be granted upon request, by letter, with a copy

to the other parties, if the party [not attorney] lives and works

outside the Eastern District of California, and attendance in

person would constitute a hardship. If telephone attendance is

allowed, the party must be immediately available throughout the

conference until excused regardless of time zone differences. 

Any other special arrangements desired in cases where settlement

authority rests with a governing body, shall also be proposed in

advance by letter copied to all other parties. 

4. Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. 

At least five (5) days prior to the Settlement Conference the

parties shall submit, directly to the Magistrate Judge's

chambers, a confidential settlement conference statement. The

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 6 of 9
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

7

statement should not be filed with the Clerk of the Court nor

served on any other party. Each statement shall be clearly

marked "confidential" with the date and time of the Settlement

Conference indicated prominently thereon. Counsel are urged to

request the return of their statements if settlement is not

achieved and if such a request is not made the Court will dispose

of the statement.

5. The Confidential Settlement Conference

Statement shall include the following: 

a. A brief statement of the facts of the 

case.

b. A brief statement of the claims and 

defenses, i.e., statutory or other grounds upon which the claims

are founded; a forthright evaluation of the parties' likelihood

of prevailing on the claims and defenses; and a description of

the major issues in dispute.

c. A summary of the proceedings to date.

d. An estimate of the cost and time to be

expended for further discovery, pre-trial and trial.

e. The relief sought.

f. The parties' position on settlement,

including present demands and offers and a history of past

settlement discussions, offers and demands. 

XIV. Request For Bifurcation, Appointment Of Special Master, 

Or Other Techniques To Shorten Trial. 

1. The parties agree that the trial should be phased and

liability tried before damages. Further, the amount of any

punitive damages shall be tried in a third phase after any

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 7 of 9
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

8

finding of liability and entitlement to punitive damages. 

XV. Related Matters Pending.

1. There are no related matters.

XVI. Compliance With Federal Procedure.

1. The Court requires compliance with the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the

Eastern District of California. To aid the court in the

efficient administration of this case, all counsel are directed

to familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice of the Eastern District

of California, and keep abreast of any amendments thereto.

XVII. Effect Of This Order.

1. The foregoing order represents the best

estimate of the court and counsel as to the agenda most suitable

to bring this case to resolution. The trial date reserved is

specifically reserved for this case. If the parties determine at

any time that the schedule outlined in this order cannot be met,

counsel are ordered to notify the court immediately of that fact

so that adjustments may be made, either by stipulation or by

subsequent scheduling conference. 

2. Stipulations extending the deadlines contained

herein will not be considered unless they are accompanied by

affidavits or declarations, and where appropriate attached

exhibits, which establish good cause for granting the relief

requested. 

///

///

///

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 8 of 9
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

9

3. Failure to comply with this order may result in

the imposition of sanctions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 24, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01335-LJO -DLB Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 9 of 9