Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-01166/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-01166-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards

---

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

DAVID P. MASTAGNI, ESQ. (SBN 57721)

DAVID E. MASTAGNI, ESQ. (SBN 204244)

JAMES B. CARR, ESQ. (SBN 53274)

ISAAC S. STEVENS, ESQ. (SBN 251245)

MASTAGNI, HOLSTEDT, AMICK,

MILLER & JOHNSEN

A Professional Corporation

1912 “I” Street

Sacramento, California 95811-3151

Telephone: (916) 446-4692

Facsimile: (916) 447-4614

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANIEL J. MITCHELL, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

COUNTY OF MONTEREY,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 5:08-01166-JW

STIPULATION REGARDING

SEPARATE STATEMENT IN

SUPPORT OF MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT/SUMMARY

ADJUDICATION

WHEREAS, this action involves twenty plaintiffs and the defendant has asserted nineteen

affirmative defenses;

WHEREAS, the parties have conducted thirty depositions and produced thousands of pages of

documentary evidence during the course of discovery;

WHEREAS, the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment and/or adjudication;

WHEREAS, the parties believe consideration of the previously filed separate statement of

undisputed facts and declarations in support will enhance the clarity of the parties’ moving and

opposition papers and allow the Court to quickly identify and locate the evidence the parties rely on in

their motions,

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated, between the parties, and each of them, that they

STIPULATION REGARDING Mitchell v. County of Monterey

SEPARATE STATEMENT Northern District Case No. C08-01166 JW

 

Case 5:08-cv-01166-JW Document 135 Filed 01/05/11 Page 1 of 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

request that the court issue anorder allowing Plaintiffs’ previouslyfiled separate statement of undisputed

factsto be considered in support of their motionsfor summary judgment/adjudication and in opposition

to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment/adjudication; and that Defendant’s evidence filed in

support of its motion for summary judgment/adjudication also be considered in opposition to Plaintiffs’

motions for summary judgment; except to the extent Plaintiffs’ separate statement or Defendant’s

evidence is not relevant or admissible. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: January 4, 2011 MASTAGNI, HOLSTEDT, AMICK,

MILLER & JOHNSEN

By: /s/ Isaac S. Stevens ISAAC S. STEVENS

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DAN MITCHELL, et al.

Dated: January 4, 2011 By: /s/ William K. Rentz WILLIAM K. RENTZ Sr. Deputy County Counsel Attorney for Defendant COUNTY OF MONTEREY

STIPULATION REGARDING Mitchell v. County of Monterey

SEPARATE STATEMENT Northern District Case No. C08-01166 JW

 -2-

Case 5:08-cv-01166-JW Document 135 Filed 01/05/11 Page 2 of 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

[PROPOSED] ORDER FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SEPARATE STATEMENT

IT IS SO ORDERED

Dated: January 4, 2011 ________________________________

Hon. James Ware

STIPULATION REGARDING Mitchell v. County of Monterey

SEPARATE STATEMENT Northern District Case No. C08-01166 JW

 -3-

: January 5, 2011

Case 5:08-cv-01166-JW Document 135 Filed 01/05/11 Page 3 of 3