arrow left
arrow right
  • Karen Micheli vs. The City of Fresno / LEAD CASE / CLASS ACTION30 Unlimited - Environmental/Toxic Tort document preview
  • Karen Micheli vs. The City of Fresno / LEAD CASE / CLASS ACTION30 Unlimited - Environmental/Toxic Tort document preview
  • Karen Micheli vs. The City of Fresno / LEAD CASE / CLASS ACTION30 Unlimited - Environmental/Toxic Tort document preview
  • Karen Micheli vs. The City of Fresno / LEAD CASE / CLASS ACTION30 Unlimited - Environmental/Toxic Tort document preview
  • Karen Micheli vs. The City of Fresno / LEAD CASE / CLASS ACTION30 Unlimited - Environmental/Toxic Tort document preview
  • Karen Micheli vs. The City of Fresno / LEAD CASE / CLASS ACTION30 Unlimited - Environmental/Toxic Tort document preview
  • Karen Micheli vs. The City of Fresno / LEAD CASE / CLASS ACTION30 Unlimited - Environmental/Toxic Tort document preview
  • Karen Micheli vs. The City of Fresno / LEAD CASE / CLASS ACTION30 Unlimited - Environmental/Toxic Tort document preview
						
                                

Preview

1 DOUGLAS T. SLOAN, City Attorney CITY OF FRESNO 2 By: Tina R. Griffin, Chief Assistant City Attorney (SBN 210328) 2600 Fresno Street 3 Fresno, CA 93721-3602 Telephone: (559) 621-7500 4 Facsimile: (559) 488-1084 5 Jeffery L. Caufield, Esq. (SBN 166524) jeff@caufieldjames.com 6 Matthew D. McMillan, Esq. (SBN 262394) mattm@caufieldjames.com 7 CAUFIELD & JAMES, LLP 2851 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 410 RECEIVED 8 San Diego, CA 92108-3843 Telephone: (619) 325-0441 4/8/2021 3:23 PM 9 Facsimile: (619) 325-0231 FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT By: C. York, Deputy Exempt from filing 10 Attorneys for Defendant fee pursuant to THE CITY OF FRESNO Gov’t Code § 6103 11 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 12 COUNTY OF FRESNO 13 14 ) Lead Case No.: 16CECG02937 KAREN MICHELI, et al., ) Consolidated Case No.: 17CECG01724 15 ) Plaintiffs, ) Assigned for All Purposes to: 16 ) Hon. Judge Rosemary McGuire, Dept. 502 v. ) 17 ) STIPULATION FOR ORDER EXTENDING THE CITY OF FRESNO, et al. ) TIME FOR DEFENDANT CITY OF FRESNO 18 ) TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO Defendant. ) PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED FIFTH 19 ) AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT; JACKIE FLANNERY, et al., ) [PROPOSED] ORDER 20 ) Plaintiffs, ) Lead Action Filed: September 9, 2016 21 ) Consolidated Action Filed: May 17, 2017 v. ) 22 ) Trial Date: Not Set THE CITY OF FRESNO, et al. ) 23 ) Defendant. ) 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION FOR ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO FIFTH AMENDED COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 2 Plaintiffs and Defendant City of Fresno (“Defendant”) in the above-captioned, consolidated 3 actions, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby respectfully stipulate to the Court’s 4 entry of an order extending the time for Defendant to file a responsive pleading to Plaintiffs’ 5 Consolidated Fifth Amended Class Action Complaint: 6 STIPULATION 7 1. WHEREAS, on February 26, 2021, the Court issued an order sustaining Defendant’s 8 demurrer to Plaintiffs’ cause of action for Unjust Enrichment in the Consolidated Fourth Amended 9 Complaint, with leave to amend, for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; 10 2. WHEREAS, on March 8, 2021, Plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Fifth Amended Class 11 Action Complaint (“5AC”), which asserted an amended cause of action for Unjust Enrichment plead in 12 the alternative to Plaintiffs’ Breach of Contract cause of action; 13 3. WHEREAS, between approximately March 26, 2021 and April 6, 2021, counsel for all 14 parties met and conferred on Defendant’s proposed demurrer to Plaintiffs’ Unjust Enrichment cause of 15 action in the 5AC; 16 4. WHEREAS, on April 6, 2021, Plaintiffs filed a Request for Dismissal seeking court 17 approval of Plaintiffs' voluntary dismissal of the Unjust Enrichment cause of action in the 5AC, without 18 prejudice; 19 5. WHEREAS, as of the date of this filing the Court has not issued a ruling on Plaintiffs’ 20 Request for Dismissal of the Unjust Enrichment cause of action without prejudice; 21 6. WHEREAS, the current deadline for Defendant to file its responsive pleading to the 5AC 22 is April 9, 2021; 23 7. WHEREAS, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1054(a), an extension of time to 24 file a responsive pleading shall be granted when all attorneys of record of parties who have appeared in 25 the action agree in writing to the extension of time; 26 8. WHEREAS, Defendant and Plaintiffs agree that good cause exists to extend the time for 27 Defendant to file its responsive pleading to the 5AC to provide the Court with additional time to 28 consider and rule on Plaintiffs’ Request for Dismissal, to ensure an order dismissing Plaintiffs’ Unjust 1 STIPULATION FOR ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO FIFTH AMENDED COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 Enrichment cause of action without prejudice has been entered prior to the time Defendant files its 2 responsive pleading, and to provide Defendant with adequate time to file its responsive pleading once 3 the Court issues an order; 4 NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE TO THE FOLLOWING: 5 1. The Court should enter an order extending the time for Defendant to file Defendant’s 6 Answer to the 5AC until three (3) days after such time as the Court enters an order dismissing Plaintiffs’ 7 Unjust Enrichment cause of action, without prejudice. 8 9 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 10 11 DATED: April 8, 2021 CAUFIELD & JAMES, LLP 12 Matthew D. McMillan, Esq. 13 Attorneys for Defendant City of Fresno 14 DATED: April 8, 2021 BOUCHER LLP 15 16 Shehnaz M. Bhujwala, Esq. 17 Attorneys for the Micheli Case Plaintiffs 18 DATED: April 8, 2021 COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY LLP 19 20 Julie Fieber, Esq. Attorneys for the Flannery Plaintiffs 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 STIPULATION FOR ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO FIFTH AMENDED COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 The Court, having considered the stipulated request by Plaintiffs and Defendant City of Fresno in 3 the consolidated cases entitled Micheli, et al. v. City of Fresno, et al., Lead Case No. 16CECG02937, 4 and Flannery, et al. v. City of Fresno, et al., Case No. 17CECG01724 (“Consolidated Cases”), and 5 based upon a showing of good cause, hereby enters the following order: 6 1. The parties’ stipulated request is GRANTED; 7 2. The time for Defendant City of Fresno to file an Answer to Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Fifth 8 Amended Class Action Complaint is hereby extended until three (3) days after such time as the Court 9 enters an order dismissing Plaintiffs’ Unjust Enrichment cause of action, without prejudice. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 DATED: April ___, 2021 13 14 15 HONORABLE ROSEMARY MCGUIRE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION FOR ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO FIFTH AMENDED COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR COURT USE ONLY COUNTY OF FRESNO Karen Micheli, et al. v. The City of Fresno, et al. (Lead Case) Jackie Flannery, et al. v. The City of Fresno, et al. (Consolidated Case) Jeffery L. Caufield (SBN 166524) Tel: (619) 325-0441 Matthew D. McMillan (SBN 262394) Fax: (619) 325-0231 CAUFIELD & JAMES, LLP 2851 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 410 San Diego, CA 92108 Attorneys for: Defendant The City of Fresno Date: Case Number: Time: 16CECG02937 (Lead Case) Courtroom: 502 17CECG01724 (Consolidated Case) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, declare: I am employed in the County of San Diego, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to this action. My business address is 2851 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 410, San Diego, California 92108. I served a copy of the following document(s): STIPULATION FOR ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT CITY OF FRESNO TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED FIFTH AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER (BY MAIL) I caused each such envelope to be sealed and placed for collection and mailing from my business address. I am readily familiar with Caufield & James’ practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing, said practice being that in the ordinary course of business mail is deposited with the postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States Postal Service the same day as itis placed for collection. I am aware that upon motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or postage meter date on the envelope is more than one day after the date of deposit for mailing contained in this affidavit. Service by this method was sent to: (BY OVERNIGHT MAIL) I am readily familiar with the practice of Caufield & James for the collection and processing of correspondence for overnight delivery and know that the document(s) described herein will be deposited in a box or other facility regularly maintained for overnight delivery. Service by this method was sent to: (BY FACSIMILE) This document was transmitted by facsimile transmission from (619) 325-0231 and the transmission was reported as complete and without error. I then caused the transmitting facsimile machine to properly issue a transmission report confirming the transmission. (BY PERSONAL SERVICE) I caused each such envelope to be sealed and given to a courier for delivery on the same date. A proof of service signed by the authorized courier will be filed forthwith. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION) This document was transmitted by electronic transmission from rebecca@caufieldjames.com and the transmission was reported as complete and without error. I then caused the transmitting e-mail account to properly issue a report confirming the electronic transmission. SEE SERVICE LIST I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 8, 2021, at San Diego, California. Rebecca Vargas ____________________________ Rebecca Vargas _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE SERVICE LIST Raymond P. Boucher, Esq. Shehnaz M. Bhujwala, Esq. Frank M. Pitre, Esq. BOUCHER LLP Julie L. Fieber, Esq. 21600 Oxnard St., Suite 600 Donald J. Magilligan, Esq. Woodland Hills, CA 91367 COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY LLP Tel: (818) 340-5400 840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 Fax: (818) 340-5401 Burlingame, CA 94010 ray@boucher.la fpitre@cpmlegal.com bhujwala@boucher.la jfieber@cpmlegal.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Karen Micheli, et al. dmagilligan@cpmlegal.com Telephone: (650) 697-6000 Stuart R. Chandler, Esq. Facsimile: (650) 697-0577 STUART R. CHANDLER, APC Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Jackie Flannery, et al. 761 E. Locust Ave., Suite 101 Fresno, CA 93720 Michael E. Gatto, Esq. Tel: (559) 431-7770 LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL E. GATTO Fax: (559) 431-7778 PC stuart@chandlerlaw.com 2540 Camino Diablo, Suite 200 Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Karen Micheli, et al. Walnut Creek, CA 94597-3944 mgatto@gattopc.com Gregory Owen, Esq. Telephone: (925) 2781705 OWEN, PATTERSON & OWEN, LLP Facsimile: (925) 932-1961 23822 W. Valencia Blvd., Suite 303 Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Jackie Flannery, et al. Valencia, CA 91355 Tel: (661) 799-3899 VIA EMAIL ONLY Fax: (661) 799-2774 greg@owenpatterson.com Tina R. Griffin Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Karen Micheli, et al. City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Brian S. Kabateck, Esq. Fresno, CA 93721-3602 Christopher B. Noyes, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant, City of Fresno KABATECK BROWN KELLNER LLP Tina.Griffin@fresno.gov 633 W. Fifth Street., Suite 3200 Los Angeles, CA 90071 bsk@kbklawyers.com cn@kbklawyers.com Telephone: (213) 217-5000 Facsimile: (213) 217-5010 Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Jackie Flannery, et al. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE