Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jones-Hundley v. Lynwood Unified School Dist.

June 30, 2009

FANNIE JONES-HUNDLEY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
LYNWOOD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, RACHEL CHAVEZ, MARTINA RODRIGUEZ, MARIA LOPEZ, JOSE LUIS SOLACHE, ALFONSO MORALES, GUADALUPE RODRIGUEZ, DHYAN LAL, ROBERTO CASAS, DIANE LUCAS; ANIM MENER, MALCOLM BUTLER, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dean D. Pregerson United States District Judge

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY, FOR SETTLEMENT CONFERENCES, TO CONTINUE THE HEARING ON THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND TO CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE

[Motions filed on May 14, 2009]

The instant motions involve five Plaintiffs from seven related cases against Defendant Lynwood Unified School District, arising from claims of age, race, national origin, and disability discrimination. Five of the seven*fn1 Plaintiffs filed identical motions requesting that this Court permit additional discovery and move the upcoming trial and summary judgment hearing dates.*fn2 These Plaintiffs also request that the Court order additional settlement conferences.

I. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY AND TO CONTINUE THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

A. Background

The five Plaintiffs and cases at issue on this motion are as follows:

1) Cornelia Davis, CV 06-06066;

2) Fannie Jones Hundley, CV 07-05025;

3) John Delaney, CV 07-05049;

4) Ngozi Usim, CV 07-05052; and

5) Annette Mills, CV 07-05055.

The Davis case was removed to this Court on September 22, 2006. The other cases were filed in federal court on August 2, 2007. The discovery cut-off for all cases was October 1, 2008. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have had over one year in four cases and over two years in the fifth in order to conduct discovery.

Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment in all five cases in May. In response, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion for additional discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f). Plaintiffs state that they need to conduct the deposition of three persons: Malcolm Butler, Harold Cebrun, and Martina Rodriguez. (Rees Decl. ¶¶ 6, 10-13.) Plaintiffs also state that they need additional written discovery in the area of statistics. (Rees Decl. ¶ 14.) Because Defendants' motion for summary judgment argues that Plaintiffs do not have evidence of statistical support for their allegations, Plaintiffs wish to conduct ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.