Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-00200/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-00200-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mark Bewsher
Counter-claimant
County of Marin
Counter-claimant
Maxwell Drever
Counter-claimant
Russell Keil
Counter-claimant
Joanna Kemper
Counter-claimant
Marilyn Knight
Counter-claimant
Martha Co.
Counter-claimant
Jerry Riessen
Counter-claimant
Town of Tiburon
Counter-defendant

Document Text:

Case No.: C 06 0200 SBA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]ORDER 

EXTENDING TOWN OF TIBURON’S TIME TO 

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 

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 

PATRICK K. FAULKNER, COUNTY COUNSEL 

DAVID L. ZALTSMAN, Deputy (SBN 113053) 

3501 Civic Center Dr., Room 303 

San Rafael, CA 94903 

Tel.: (415) 499-6117, Fax: (415) 499-3796 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

COUNTY OF MARIN 

JAMES M. WAGSTAFFE (SBN 95535) 

MICHAEL VON LOEWENFELDT (SBN 178665) 

TRICIA E. WEAVER (SBN 232242) 

KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP 

100 Spear Street, Suite 1800 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Tel: (415) 371-8500, Fax: (415) 371-0500 

Attorneys for Real Party In Interest 

TOWN OF TIBURON 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

COUNTY OF MARIN, a California County, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

MARTHA CO., a California corporation, 

 Defendant. 

__________________________________________

Case No.: C 06 0200 SBA 

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING 

TOWN OF TIBURON’S TIME TO RESPOND 

TO COMPLAINT 

Hon. Saundra B. Armstrong 

TOWN OF TIBURON, a California municipality, 

RUSSELL KEIL, JERRY RIESSEN, MAXWELL 

DREVER, MARILYN KNIGHT, JOANNA 

KEMPER and MARK BEWSHER, individuals; 

 Real Parties-In-Interest. 

 

Case 4:06-cv-00200-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/05/06 Page 1 of 3
Case No.: C 06 0200 SBA - 1 - STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]ORDER 

EXTENDING TOWN OF TIBURON’S TIME TO 

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 

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 

 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2 and 7-12, the County of Marin and the Town of Tiburon, 

through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 

 1. Plaintiff, County of Marin (the “County”), filed this action for equitable relief on January 

11, 2006. The action was assigned to the ADR Multi-Option Program as well as the ECF Program. 

 2. Defendant, Martha Co., returned its executed waiver of service on January 18, 2006 

allowing it until March 20, 2006 to file its responsive pleading.

 3. Real Parties-in-Interest, the Town of Tiburon (the “Town”), and Russell Keil, Jerry 

Riessen, Maxwell Drever, Marilyn Knight, Joanna Kemper and Mark Bewsher have also returned their 

executed waivers of service, but have not yet filed an initial pleading. The Town’s pleading is due on 

April 4, 2006 pursuant to the prior stipulation of the parties pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-1(a). 

 4. On March 20, 2006, Defendant Martha Co. filed a motion inter alia to dismiss the 

complaint pursuant to FRCP 12(b). One of the main arguments raised by Defendant is its contention 

that this Court does not have jurisdiction over the claims of the parties denominated “Real Parties in 

Interest” herein. Another of Defendant’s arguments is that the Town should be demoninated a plaintiff 

or defendant, rather than a real party in interest. 

 5. The County and the Town believe that the Court has jurisdiction over these claims; 

however, if Defendant is correct, then the expenditure of public resources necessary for the Town to file 

an initial pleading will be wasteful and unnecessary. In addition, if the Town is re-designated a plaintiff 

in this action, a determination that is under review, then obviously no “response” to the Complaint 

would be necessary. 

 6. In light of this, counsel for the County and the Town agree that it would be most 

efficacious to determine whether the Town is properly denominated a plaintiff, and whether there is 

jurisdiction over this action, before the Town files the line-by-line response to the Complaint otherwise 

Case 4:06-cv-00200-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/05/06 Page 2 of 3
Case No.: C 06 0200 SBA - 2 - STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]ORDER 

EXTENDING TOWN OF TIBURON’S TIME TO 

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 

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 

required by the Federal Rules. The County and the Town stipulate that the Town shall have until May 

24, 2006 to file a response to the current Complaint (assuming that the current complaint is not amended 

and/or the case is not dismissed prior to that time). 

 7. No prior requests for an extension of this deadline have been filed by the Town or 

County in this action; however, as mentioned above the parties have already stipulated to a 15 day 

extension per Rule 6-1(a). 

 8. By entering into this stipulation, neither the County nor the Town is conceding that there 

is any merit to Defendant’s pending motion. 

 9. By entering into this stipulation, the Town of Tiburon is not making a general appearance 

in this action. 

SO STIPULATED 

DATE: April 3, 2006 

 PATRICK K. FAULKNER 

 COUNTY COUNSEL 

 ______/s/___________________________________ 

 By: DAVID L. ZALTSMAN 

 Deputy County Counsel 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff County of Marin 

Date: April 3, 2006 KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP 

 /s/ 

 By: Michael von Loewenfeldt 

 Attorneys for the Town of Tiburon 

 ORDER 

Good cause appearing, PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 

Date: April 5, 2006 

 Honorable Saundra B. Armstrong 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 4:06-cv-00200-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/05/06 Page 3 of 3