Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DAMIEN v. CITY OF MERCED, 1:16-cv-01869-AWI-MSJ. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170109462 Visitors: 11
Filed: Jan. 05, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 05, 2017
Summary: Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to File and Serve Second Amended Complaint and Time to Respond ANTHONY W. ISHII , Senior District Judge . WHEREAS, on October 7, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced, Case number 16CV-03050. WHEREAS, on October 28, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced. WHEREAS, Plaintiffs did not serve defendants with the first amended complaint that was fi
More

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to File and Serve Second Amended Complaint and Time to Respond

WHEREAS, on October 7, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced, Case number 16CV-03050.

WHEREAS, on October 28, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced.

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs did not serve defendants with the first amended complaint that was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced on October 28, 2016.

WHEREAS, on November 7, 2016, Plaintiffs filed an ex parte application to amend the first amended complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced.

WHEREAS, Defendants were not notified of the ex parte application to amend the first amended complaint.

WHEREAS, on November 14, 2016, the Court granted Plaintiffs' ex parte application to amend the first amended complaint.

WHEREAS, Defendants were not served with the order granting the ex parte application to amend the first amended complaint.

WHEREAS, on November 29, 2016, Plaintiffs served defendants with the original complaint that was filed on October 7, 2016.

WHEREAS, on December 7, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced. A copy of the second amended complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

WHEREAS, a new defendant, Damian Alex Vega, was properly named in this suit via the second amended complaint, filed on December 7, 2016, in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced.

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs did not serve defendants County of Merced and Vern Warnke with the second amended complaint that was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Merced on December 7, 2016.

WHEREAS, on December 13, 2016, Defendant, City of Merced, filed a notice of removal to the United States District Court, Eastern District Of California—Fresno Division.

WHEREAS, on December 29, 2016, Defendants, County of Merced and Sheriff of the County of Merced, Vern Warnke, in his capacity of Sheriff of the County of Merced, filed a joinder in notice of removal to the United States District Court, Eastern District of California—Fresno Division. Not all Defendants have filed a joinder in notice of removal to the United States District Court, Eastern District of California—Fresno Division.

The parties, by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate and agree that the second amended complaint will be deemed served upon the filing of this stipulation, and that Defendants City of Merced, Norm Andrade, County of Merced and Vern Warnke will have twenty one (21) days from the date of the order on the stipulation to respond to the second amended complaint.

ORDER

Upon stipulation of the parties, it is ordered that:

1. The Second Amended Complaint is deemed served; 2. Defendants City of Merced, Norm Andrade, County of Merced and Vern Warnke have twenty one (21) days from the date of this order to respond to the second amended complaint; and 3. The active complaint in this matter shall be Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint, which is Document No. 6-1 in the Court's Docket.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer