Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00328/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00328-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
I. Barrimond
Defendant
J. Capriola
Defendant
City Of Fresno
Defendant
Zella Maye Freeman
Plaintiff
R. Garrison
Defendant
J. Hollins
Defendant
R. Perez
Defendant
A. Simonson
Defendant
Mark A. Yee
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

 

James D. Weakley, Esq. Bar No. 082853

Erica M.Camarena, Esq. Bar No. 227981

THE LAW FIRM OF

WEAKLEY, RATLIFF,

ARENDT & McGUIRE, LLP

1630 East Shaw Avenue, Suite 176

Fresno, California 93710

Telephone: (559) 221-5256

Facsimile: (559) 221-5262

Attorneys for Defendants, J. CAPRIOLA, I. BARRIMOND, 

J. HOLLINS, R. PEREZ, A. SIMONSON; CITY OF FRESNO, R. GARRISON,

MARK A. YEE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ZELLA MAYE FREEMAN, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY OF FRESNO, R. GARRISON (F.P.D.

Badge No. 780), MARK A. YEE (F.P.D. Bade

No. 692), J. CAPRIOLA (F.S.O. Badge No.

7622), I. BARRIMOND (F.S.O Badge No.

1153), J. HOLLINS (F.S.O. Badge No. 2346),

R. PEREZ (F.S.O. Badge No. 6169), A.

SIMONSON (F.S.O. Badge No. 9364),

inclusive,

Defendants.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 1:05-CV-00328-OWW-SMS

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING

EXTENSION TO CONDUCT

INDEPENDENT MENTAL EXAMINATION

OF PLAINTIFF

FRCP 29; Local Rule 6-144(a)

Trial Date: October 24, 2006

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties that Defendants are given an

extension of time to have Plaintiff, Zella Maye Freeman, submit to an Independent Mental Examination

(“IME”). 

Pursuant to the Court’s Amended Order (Court Docket No. 52), Defendants were to have

Plaintiff submit to an IME on or before July 13, 2006. The parties have agreed to an extension and

Defendants now have up and until September 13, 2006 to have Plaintiff submit to an IME. 

//

Case 1:05-cv-00328-OWW -SMS Document 56 Filed 07/18/06 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

It is further stipulated that the parties will meet and confer and provide the Court with a

proposed Order under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 35, regarding the terms of the

examination (i.e., time, place, manner, conditions, persons present, and scope). 

The Proposed Order will be prepared by Defendants and submitted to Plaintiff’s counsel for

review, then filed with the Court no later than August 4, 2006. Should any issues arise with respect to

the terms in the Rule 35 Order, the parties are to bring these issues to the attention of the Court by

August 4, 2006. 

All other dates on the Scheduling Order will remain the same. 

DATED: July 5, 2006

WEAKLEY, RATLIFF, ARENDT & McGUIRE, LLP

By:__/s/ Erica M. Camarena 

Erica M. Camarena 

Attorney for Defendants

DATED: July 7, 2006 NUTALL & COLEMAN 

By: _/s/ Wesley E. Stupar_(as authorized on July 7, 2006)

Wesley E. Stupar

 Attorney for Plaintiff

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 17, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00328-OWW -SMS Document 56 Filed 07/18/06 Page 2 of 2