Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00432/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00432-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Roger Butterfield
Defendant
Sheree Rene Coe
Plaintiff
City Of Lodi
Defendant
Chris Piombo
Defendant
H. Schaeffer
Defendant

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SHEREE RENE COE, an individual, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

Lodi Police Officer H. SCHAEFFER 

(Badge #32); Lodi Police Officer ROGER 

BUTTERFIELD; Lodi Police Officer 

CHRIS PIOMBO; CITY OF LODI; and 

DOES 1 THROUGH 30, inclusive, 

Defendants. 

No. 2:13-cv-00432-KJM-CKD 

ORDER 

 On May 21, 2015, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 

47.) Plaintiff opposed it. (ECF No. 48.) In her opposition, plaintiff contends she needs 

additional discovery on her supervisorial liability claims. (Id. at 10.) More specifically, plaintiff 

“requests denial of defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of supervisorial 

liability against defendants Butterfield and Piombo because [she] requires additional time to 

complete discovery into the facts and circumstances surrounding her supervisorial liability 

theory.” (Id.) Plaintiff made the same request in a separately filed motion to modify the 

scheduling order. (ECF No. 37.) On June 17, 2015, this court denied plaintiff’s request. (ECF 

No. 51.) 

Case 2:13-cv-00432-KJM-CKD Document 56 Filed 07/27/15 Page 1 of 2
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 

2

 Upon reconsideration, in light of the summary judgment briefing and the court’s 

desire to resolve the matter on its merits, the court now supersedes its prior order (ECF No. 51) to 

allow plaintiff to take defendants Butterfield’s and Piombo’s depositions. Fed.R.Civ. P. 56. 

Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to depose each defendant for up to one full day, two days in total. 

The depositions shall be completed by September 1, 2015. 

 Accordingly, this court DENIES defendants’ pending motion for summary 

judgment (ECF No. 47) without prejudice. Upon the depositions’ completion, or after September 

1, whichever is earlier, defendants may renew their current motion (ECF No. 47) simply by filing 

a simple notice of renewal and new hearing date. Alternately, defendants may file a new motion 

for summary judgment renewing their original arguments and making additional arguments only 

as supported by the depositions allowed by this order. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: July 24, 2015. 

Case 2:13-cv-00432-KJM-CKD Document 56 Filed 07/27/15 Page 2 of 2