Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01225/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01225-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
David Mugridge
Cross Defendant
Paul A. Schlichting
Cross Claimant

Document Text:

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

 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

Keith M. White #188536

COLEMAN & HOROWITT, LLP

Attorneys at Law

499 West Shaw, Suite 116

Fresno, California 93704

Telephone: (559) 248-4820

Facsimile: (559) 248-4830

Attorneys for Defendant 

PAUL A. SCHLICHTING

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID MUGRIDGE,

Plaintiff,

v.

PAUL A. SCHLICHTING

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:16-cv-01225-LJO-SAB

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 

CONTINUE PLAINTIFF DAVID 

MUGRIDGE=S MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

WHEREAS, Plaintiff DAVID MUGRIDGE=s ("Plaintiff"), Motion for Summary Judgment is set 

to be heard on October 25, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4;

WHEREAS, Defendant PAUL A. SCHLICHTING (ADefendant@), retained counsel for the first 

time on Saturday, October 8, 2016;

WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant have been participated in settlement discussions 

since Monday, October 9, 2016;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendant wish to focus their efforts and limited resources on resolving 

this dispute, and/or narrowing issues, and removing barriers to access rather than respond to Plaintiff=s 

Motion for Summary Judgment and take other action that may be necessary to properly litigate this matter;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendant wish additional time to attempt resolution of the matter 

without incurring fees and costs associated with filing additional pleadings, preparing for and attending 

the hearing on the Motion for Summary Judgment as currently scheduled;

WHEREAS, the parties wish to conserve the Court's resources and time and not unnecessarily 

Case 1:16-cv-01225-LJO-SAB Document 10 Filed 10/13/16 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

K:\LJO\SIGNED_ORDERS\16CV1225.MUGRIDGE.STIP.CONTINUE.MSJ.DOCX 2 

 STIPULATION AND ORDER 

burden the Court with a matter that may be informally resolved;

NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff DAVID MUGRIDGE, by and through his counsel of record, 

Layne Hayden of Layne Hayden Attorney at Law, and Defendant PAUL A. SCHLICHTING, by and 

through his counsel of record, Keith M. White of Coleman & Horowitt, LLP hereby stipulate as follows:

1. That Plaintiff DAVID MUGRIDGE=s Motion for Summary Judgment set for October 25, 

2016, be continued to a date after December 13, 2016 to allow the parties to thoroughly explore the 

informal resolution of the matter and for the parties to properly respond to Plaintiff=s complaint, 

potentially amend the Complaint (and Scheduling Order), oppose Plaintiff=s Motion for Summary 

Judgment and take other action that may be necessary to properly litigate this action if settlement is not 

reached. 

Dated: October 13, 2016 COLEMAN & HOROWITT, LLP

By:____/s/ Keith M. White______________

KEITH M. WHITE

Attorneys for Defendant, 

PAUL A. SCHLICHTING

IT IS SO STIPULATED:

Dated: October 13, 2016 LAYNE HAYDEN ATTORNEY AT LAW

By:____/s/ Layne Hayden______________

LAYNE HAYDEN

Attorney for Plaintiff

DAVID MUGRIDGE

(Order on following page.)

Case 1:16-cv-01225-LJO-SAB Document 10 Filed 10/13/16 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

K:\LJO\SIGNED_ORDERS\16CV1225.MUGRIDGE.STIP.CONTINUE.MSJ.DOCX 3 

 STIPULATION AND ORDER 

ORDER

Upon reading and reviewing the above Stipulation, and good cause therefor appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. The hearing on the Motion for Summary Judgment of this matter currently set for October 

25, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 be continued to December 15, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4. 

If the parties wish to file amended pleadings or otherwise modify the Court=s Scheduling Order, they must 

do so by appropriate stipulation and order or motion.

2. The parties are informed that it is this Court’s practice to review pending motions upon the 

expiration of the reply deadline to determine whether a hearing is necessary or would be helpful. The 

Court will notify the parties shortly thereafter by minute order whether the motion will be taken under 

submission on the papers pursuant to Local Rule 230(g). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 13, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-01225-LJO-SAB Document 10 Filed 10/13/16 Page 3 of 3