C.C. v. Paradise High School

E.D. California

C.C. v. Paradise High School

DecidedOctober 24, 2019

Docket2:16-cv-02210

StatusUnknown

This text of C.C. v. Paradise High School (C.C. v. Paradise High School) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

C.C. v. Paradise High School, (E.D. Cal. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 C.C., No. 2:16-cv-02210-KJM-DMC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 PARADISE HIGH SCHOOL; PARADISE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 On August 30, 2018, defendant moved for summary judgment, ECF No. 37, and 19 on September 10, 2018, plaintiff moved for partial summary judgment. The court has not yet 20 issued a decision resolving these motions. The final pretrial conference in this case is currently 21 set for November 6, 2019. ECF No. 80. On October 11, 2019, defendants moved for a stay of 22 the case pending the court’s resolution of the cross motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs 23 have not opposed. 24 It is within this court’s power to stay the proceedings in this case. CMAX, Inc. v. 25 Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962) (citing Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254–55 26 (1936)). In deciding whether or not to do so, the court must weigh “the competing interests 27 which will be affected,” including, “the possible damage which may result from the granting of a 28 stay, the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to go forward, and the 1 orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, 2 and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay.” Id. 3 Here, neither party will be prejudiced from a stay, as it is in both parties’ interest 4 to prevent unnecessarily preparing for trial, and to narrow any disputes through summary 5 judgment practice. Furthermore, discovery in this case is already closed, so neither party will be 6 prevented from obtaining any necessary evidence. Accordingly, the court finds it appropriate to 7 stay the case until the court resolves the parties’ pending summary judgment motions. 8 The hearing scheduled for November 6, 2019 is hereby VACATED and all 9 remaining deadlines are STAYED until the court issues its decision on the motions for summary 10 judgment. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 DATED: October 24, 2019. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 C.C., No. 2:16-cv-02210-KJM-DMC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 PARADISE HIGH SCHOOL; PARADISE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 On August 30, 2018, defendant moved for summary judgment, ECF No. 37, and 19 on September 10, 2018, plaintiff moved for partial summary judgment. The court has not yet 20 issued a decision resolving these motions. The final pretrial conference in this case is currently 21 set for November 6, 2019. ECF No. 80. On October 11, 2019, defendants moved for a stay of 22 the case pending the court’s resolution of the cross motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs 23 have not opposed. 24 It is within this court’s power to stay the proceedings in this case. CMAX, Inc. v. 25 Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962) (citing Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254–55 26 (1936)). In deciding whether or not to do so, the court must weigh “the competing interests 27 which will be affected,” including, “the possible damage which may result from the granting of a 28 stay, the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to go forward, and the 1 orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, 2 and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay.” Id. 3 Here, neither party will be prejudiced from a stay, as it is in both parties’ interest 4 to prevent unnecessarily preparing for trial, and to narrow any disputes through summary 5 judgment practice. Furthermore, discovery in this case is already closed, so neither party will be 6 prevented from obtaining any necessary evidence. Accordingly, the court finds it appropriate to 7 stay the case until the court resolves the parties’ pending summary judgment motions. 8 The hearing scheduled for November 6, 2019 is hereby VACATED and all 9 remaining deadlines are STAYED until the court issues its decision on the motions for summary 10 judgment. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 DATED: October 24, 2019. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

C.C. v. Paradise High School, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cc-v-paradise-high-school-caed-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack