Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00821/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00821-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act

---

1 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUE REBUTTAL EXPERT DISCLOSURE DATE 2:07-cv-00821-GEB-DAD 

SAC 441,222,109v3 4/17/2008 

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

JAMES B. DRIMMER, State Bar No. 196890 

2550 Fifth Avenue, Suite 900 

San Diego, CA 92103 

Telephone (619) 772-2328 

Facsimile (415) 520-5335 

KATHLEEN E. FINNERTY, State Bar No. 157638 

MARC B. KOENIGSBERG, State Bar No. 204265 

GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 

1201 K Street, Suite 1100 

Sacramento, CA 95814-3938 

Phone: (916) 442-1111 

Fax: (916) 448-1709 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Auburn Racquet Club, Inc., Morris J. Drimmer, 

and Auburn Racquet Club Limited Partnership 

PAUL L. REIN, State Bar No. 43053 

JULIE A. OSTIL, State Bar No. 215202 

LAW OFFICES OF PAUL L. REIN 

200 Lakeside Drive, Suite A 

Oakland, CA 94612 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Edward Forbest and Matthew Formbes, minors, 

by JENNIFER FORBES, as their 

Guardian Ad Litem, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

EDWARD FORBES and MATTHEW 

FORBES, minors, by JENNIFER FORBES, as 

their Guardian Ad Litem, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

AUBURN RACQUET CLUB, INC.; MORRIS 

J. DRIMMER, AND AUBURN RACQUET 

CLUB LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; 

Defendants. 

Case No. 2:07-cv-00821-GEB-DAD 

 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

 ORDER TO CONTINUE REBUTTAL 

 EXPERT DISCLOSURE DATE

Complaint Filed: May 1, 2007 

Defendants Auburn Racquet Club, Inc.; Morris J. Drimmer; and Auburn Racquet 

Club Limited Partnership, and plaintiffs Edward Forbes and Matthew Forbes, by and through 

their respective counsel, hereby jointly stipulate and request that the Court grant an 

Case 2:07-cv-00821-GEB-DAD Document 20 Filed 04/28/08 Page 1 of 3
2 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUE REBUTTAL EXPERT DISCLOSURE DATE 2:07-cv-00821-GEB-DAD 

SAC 441,222,109v3 4/17/2008 

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

additional 30 day continuance of the scheduled rebuttal expert witness disclosure (April 30, 

2008), based on the following good cause: 

1. Plaintiffs filed their action seeking renovations to defendants’ health club facilities 

in Auburn, California to improve disabled access, as well as seeking damages and attorney’s 

fees, litigation expenses, and costs. 

2. On September 21, 2007, the parties conducted a joint site inspection of the 

premises. Plaintiffs informally provided defendants with their expert’s report in advance of 

the initial disclosures date in or around October 2007. At this time, defendants have 

represented that they were already engaged in the process of planning a large scale remodel 

which by nature of the scope of the work to be completed would necessarily address most if 

not all of the plaintiffs’ claims. 

3. Defendants have informally provided plaintiffs with building plans detailing the 

work to be completed, which both sides in good faith believe has significantly narrowed the 

issues. Plaintiffs have reviewed these plans and responded with the remaining issues they 

have, and defendants are diligently working with plaintiffs’ counsel to address them. 

4. On March 31, 2008, this Court issued a minute order approving a prior stipulation 

among the parties to move the deadline for rebuttal expert disclosures from March 31, 2008, 

to April 30, 2008. 

5. Since that time, counsel for all parties have continued to work productively and 

cooperatively toward the resolution of this case, exchanging information on an informal 

basis. Counsel for the parties had a productive telephone conference on April 16, 2008, the 

result of which is that plaintiff’s counsel will prepare a consent decree for review by defense 

counsel, towards the goal of resolving this case in its entirety. 

6. While the parties have been cooperating in good faith to resolve this matter and 

appear to be on the verge of doing so, the rebuttal exchange date currently looms at April 30, 

2008. Obligating the defendants to have their rebuttal expert finalize his opinions and 

prepare a report at this time would significantly increase the cost of the case without 

Case 2:07-cv-00821-GEB-DAD Document 20 Filed 04/28/08 Page 2 of 3
3 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUE REBUTTAL EXPERT DISCLOSURE DATE 2:07-cv-00821-GEB-DAD 

SAC 441,222,109v3 4/17/2008 

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

increasing the likelihood of settlement which the parties are aggressively working towards in 

the absence of formal discovery procedures. 

7. The parties therefore jointly request that the court grant a continuance of the 

rebuttal disclosure deadline for a period of 30 days from April 30, 2008 to May 30, 2008, to 

allow the parties an opportunity to negotiate further the resolution of plaintiffs’ claims. 

8. A continuance of defendants’ rebuttal expert disclosure will not affect any of the 

other deadlines in this case as discovery cut-off is not until July 31, 2008, and the last day to 

hear motions is September 22, 2008. Trial of this matter is not until February 24, 2009. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED as follows: 

1) That the rebuttal expert disclosure deadline be extended 30 days from April 30, 

2008 to May 30, 2008. All other previously scheduled dates in this matter are to remain 

unchanged. SO STIPULATED: 

Dated: April 17, 2008 PAUL L. REIN, ESQ. 

 JULIE A. OSTIL, ESQ. 

 LAW OFFICES OF PAUL L. REIN 

/s/ Julie A. Ostil 

inti s 

ated: April 17, 2008 MARC KOENIGSBERG, ESQ. 

Attorneys for Pla ff

D

GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP 

/s/ Marc B. Koenigsberg 

Attorneys for Defendants 

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

losure date is continued May 30, 2008, and all remaining dates 

in this

The rebuttal expert disc

 matter are unchanged. 

Dated: April 28, 2008 

Case 2:07-cv-00821-GEB-DAD Document 20 Filed 04/28/08 Page 3 of 3