The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Edward M. Chen U.S. District Judge
DALE L. ALLEN, JR., # 145279 LINDA MEYER, # 118190 DIRK D. LARSEN, # 246028 LOW, BALL & LYNCH 505 Montgomery Street, 7th Floor San Francisco, California 94111-2584 Telephone (415) 981-6630 Facsimile (415) 982-1634 Attorneys for Defendants BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT, GARY GEE in his official capacity as CHIEF OF POLICE for BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT, and DOROTHY DUGGER in her official capacity as GENERAL MANAGER for BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT Email: email@example.com Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Email: email@example.com JOHN L. BURRIS, # 69888 ADANTE D. POINTER, # 236229 LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS 7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120 Oakland, California 94621 Telephone (510) 839-5200 Facsimile: (510) 839-3882 Attorneys for Plaintiffs WANDA JOHNSON, individually and as personal representative of the ESTATE of OSCAR J. GRANT III, the ESTATE OF OSCAR J. GRANT III, SOPHINA MESA as Guardian ad Litem of minor, T.G. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Email: email@example.com ALISON BERRY WILKINSON, # 135890 BERRY WILKINSON LAW GROUP 4040 Civic Center Drive, Suite 200 San Rafael, CA 94903 Telephone (415) 259-6638 Facsimile (866) 578-1333 Attorney for Defendant MARYSOL DOMENICI Email: firstname.lastname@example.org WILLIAM R. RAPOPORT, # 47086 LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM R. RAPOPORT 634 Bair Island Road, Suite 400 Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone (650) 340-7107 Facsimile (650) 572-1857 Attorney for Defendant ANTHONY PIRONE Email: email@example.com MICHAEL L. RAINS, # 91013 LARA CULLINANE-SMITH, # 268671 RAINS LUCIA STERN, P.C. 2300 Contra Costa Boulevard Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Telephone (925) 609-1699 Facsimile (925) 609-1690 Attorneys for Defendant JOHANNES MEHSERLE Email: Mrains@rlslawyers.com Email: Lsmith@rlslawyers.com PANOS LAGOS, #61821 LAW OFFICES OF PANOS LAGOS 5032 Woodminster Lane Oakland, California 94602 Telephone (510) 530-4078 Facsimile (510) 530-4725 Attorneys for Plaintiff OSCAR J. GRANT, JR. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Related Cases: C09-04014 EMC (Oscar Grant, Jr.)
C09-04835 EMC (Bryson, et al.)
C10-00005 EMC (Caldwell)
JOINT SUPPLEMENTAL CASE STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER Date: April 6, 2012 Time: 10:30 a.m. Courtroom: 5, 17th Floor Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen AND RELATED ACTIONS. ) )
The parties to the above-entitled action jointly submit this Joint Supplemental Status Report. As set forth below, the action is presently stayed pending appeals taken by defendants Mehserle, Pirone 17 and Domenici, and those appeals remain unresolved. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that 18 the Court vacate the April 6, 2012 case management conference and schedule a further case 19 management conference to take place in approximately 120 days. 20
1. Factual and Procedural Background:
These related cases arise out of an incident that occurred in the early morning hours of January 1, 2009, at the Fruitvale BART Station in Oakland, California. Defendant BART Police Officers Anthony Pirone, Marysol Domenici, Johannes Mehserle, Jon Woffinden and Emery Knudtson 24 participated in the detention of decedent Oscar Grant III and plaintiffs Jack Bryson, Jr., Nigel Bryson, 25 Carlos Reyes, Michael Greer, Fernando Anicete and JohnTu Caldwell. During the encounter, Officer 26 Mehserle shot Grant, who later died from his injuries. 27 Plaintiff Wanda Johnson, Grant's mother, brought suit against BART and its officers 28 individually and as the representative of Grant's estate, along with Grant's minor daughter, T.G., by and through her guardian ad litem, Sophina Mesa, in case no. C09-00901 (the "Johnson matter"). 2
Plaintiffs Brysons, Greer, Reyes and Anicete brought suit in case no. C09-04835 (the "Bryson 3 matter"). Plaintiff Caldwell brought suit in case no. C10-00005 (the "Caldwell matter"). Plaintiff Oscar 4 Grant, Jr., the father of decedent Grant, brought suit in case no. C09-04014 (the "Grant matter"). The 5 plaintiffs alleged civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and, to varying degrees, supplemental state 6 claims. 7 8 filed motions for summary judgment/adjudication in February 2011. On May 20, 2011, the Court 9 issued an order granting in part and denying in part defendants' motions. Defendant Officers Pirone, 10 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Defendant Mehserle's reply brief was filed on December 30, 2011; 12 defendant Domenici's reply brief was filed on February 15, 2012; and defendant Pirone's reply brief 13 was filed on April 2, 2012. The appeals are thus fully briefed, but the Ninth Circuit has not scheduled 14 oral argument or issued decision in any of the appeals. 15 16 plaintiff Caldwell was killed. His mother, Zephoria Smith, has petitioned the Alameda County 17 Caldwell matter. The status of plaintiff Caldwell's claims and representation is unclear at this time and 19 will not be resolved by April 6, 2012. 20 At the Case Management Conference of September 30, 2011, in the above-captioned actions, 21 the Court formally stayed the actions pending the appeals taken by defendants Domenici, Mehserle and 22 Pirone (see Doc. No. 237). As those appeals are still unresolved, the parties respectfully request that 23 the Court vacate the April 6, 2012 case management conference and schedule a further case 24 management conference to take place in approximately 120 days. 25
The parties do not anticipate amending the pleadings at this time. T.G. settled with all defendants and dismissed her claims in February 2010. The defendants Domenici and Mehserle have appealed the court's denial of qualified immunity under § 1983 to the 11 In June 2011, plaintiff Johnson settled all of her claims against all defendants. In July 2011, Superior Court for Letters of Administration and has filed a copy of the petition in the present 18 2. Amendment of Pleadings: 26
The parties have completed non-expert discovery and have disclosed experts. Defendants 3 propose that the scope of expert discovery be restricted to depositions of the experts already disclosed. 4 5. Scheduling and Trial Setting 5 At the October 19, 2010 Case Status Conference, the court set October 22, 2010 as the trial 6 date. The court vacated that date at the March 15, 2010 Case Status Conference. 7 All parties demand a jury trial. The length of the trial will be approximately 20-25 days.
Defendants request that the expert-discovery and pretrial schedule be discussed at a further Case Management Conference following the disposition of defendant ...