Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04678/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04678-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City of Napa
Defendant
Adam Davis
Defendant
Agueda Espinoza
Plaintiff
Randolph W. Hall
Mediator
Sean Ulitin
Defendant

Document Text:

1 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Stipulated Motion and Order Extending Deadline for Mediation 

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 

MICHAEL W. BARRETT, CITY ATTORNEY (SBN 155968)

DAVID C. JONES, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY (SBN 129881)

NAPA CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (dcjones@cityofnapa.org)

CITY OF NAPA 

P.O. BOX 660 

NAPA, CA 94559 

Telephone: (707) 257-9516 

Facsimile: (707) 257-9274 

Attorneys for Defendants OFFICER SEAN ULITIN and 

OFFICER ADAM DAVIS 

ANTHONY BOSKOVICH (SBN 121198)

LAW OFFICES OF ANTHONY BOSKOVICH 

28 N. FIRST STREET, 6TH FLOOR 

SAN JOSE, CA 95113-1210 

(policemisconduct@compuserve.com) 

Telephone: (408) 286-5150 

Attorney for Plaintiff AGUEDA ESPINOZA 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

AGUEDA ESPINOZA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

OFFICER SEAN ULITIN and OFFICER ADAM 

DAVIS and the CITY OF NAPA, 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. C07 4678 EDL 

STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER 

EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR MEDIATION 

 All parties jointly present this Stipulated Motion and Order pursuant to ADR L.R. 6-5 and Civil 

L.R. 7-11 and 7-12. The Court’s assigned Mediator, Randolph W. Hall, supports the parties’ request to 

extend the current mediation deadline. 

RECITALS 

 At the May 6, 2008 case management conference, counsel for Defendants informed the Court 

that Defendants’ intention was to bring an early summary judgment motion. Counsel for Defendants 

further informed the Court that Defendants would not be in a position to seriously participate in 

Case 3:07-cv-04678-EDL Document 35 Filed 08/04/08 Page 1 of 3
2 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Stipulated Motion and Order Extending Deadline for Mediation 

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 

mediation at least until depositions of Plaintiff, her husband, and another eye witness to the relevant 

events had been taken, and more likely would not be in a position to seriously participate in mediation 

until Defendants’ summary judgment motion was decided. The Court stated it would set the mediation 

date at 90 days, subject to change at the parties’ request. 

 Pursuant to the Court’s May 8, 2008 order following case management conference, the case was 

referred to the alternative dispute resolution program for mediation to take place, “if possible,” within 90 

days of the date of the order, which would have been August 8, 2008. 

 Shortly thereafter, Defendants contacted Plaintiff to request a date for Plaintiff’s deposition, and 

the parties initially agreed to a deposition date of June 20, 2008. 

 On June 4, 2008, Plaintiff’s counsel office contacted Defendants’ counsel and informed that due 

to a trial Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel could not be available for depositions until July 28 and 29, 

2008. The parties agreed to hold those dates for the necessary depositions. 

 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, on June 25, 2008, the Court set October 14, 2008 as the last 

day for Defendants’ summary judgment motion to be filed, and November 18, 2008 for hearing on the 

matter, and further case management conference. 

 On July 10, 2008, Defendants’ counsel contacted Plaintiff’s counsel’s office to confirm July 28 

and 29, 2008 depositions. Plaintiff’s counsel’s assistant replied that Plaintiff’s counsel had been called 

for jury duty the week of July 28th. Shortly thereafter, the parties agreed to reschedule the depositions to 

August 20 and 21, 2008. 

 At a July 22, 2008 pre-mediation telephone conference among the parties and the assigned 

Mediator, Randolph W. Hall of the Oakland City Attorney’s Office, Mr. Hall stated that the parties’ 

request for an extension of time in which to complete mediation had his full support, and that the parties 

should so indicate in their request for extension. 

 Under all the circumstances described above, the parties assert that good cause exists for the 

Court to extend the time in which mediation may be accomplished as set forth below. 

STIPULATION 

 All parties jointly request that the Court vacate the current mediation deadline and order that 

mediation shall be completed in this matter no later than December 18, 2008. 

Case 3:07-cv-04678-EDL Document 35 Filed 08/04/08 Page 2 of 3
3 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Stipulated Motion and Order Extending Deadline for Mediation 

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 

SO STIPULATED. 

 LAW OFFICES OF ANTHONY BOSKOVICH 

July 24, 2008 By: /s/ 

 ANTHONY BOSKOVICH 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 CITY OF NAPA 

July 25, 2008 By: /s/ 

 DAVID C. JONES, Deputy City Attorney 

 Attorney for City Defendants 

ORDER 

 Good cause appearing, the current mediation deadline of August 8, 2008 is vacated, and the 

Court orders that mediation shall be completed in this matter no later than December 18, 2008. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: , 2008 

 MAGISTRATE JUDGE ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE 

August 4

Case 3:07-cv-04678-EDL Document 35 Filed 08/04/08 Page 3 of 3