Estate of F.R Jr. v. County of Yuba

Opinion

Mark E. Merin (State Bar No. 043849) Paul H. Masuhara (State Bar No. 289805) 2 || LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN 3 1010 F Street, Suite 300 Sacramento, California 95814 4|| Telephone: (916) 443-6911 Facsimile: (916) 447-8336 5 || E-Mail: mark @markmerin.com 6 paul @markmerin.com 7 Attorneys for Plaintiffs ESTATE OF F.R. and LORI ROSILES 8 PORTER | SCOTT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 10 Carl L. Fessenden, SBN 161494 Matthew W. Gross, SBN 324007 11 || 2180 Harvard Street, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95815 12 || TEL: 916.929.1481 FAX: 916.927.3706 cfessenden@ porterscott.com 14 || Mgross @ porterscott.com 15 Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF YUBA and YUBA COUNTY 16 SHERIFF’S OFFICE 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 18 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 19 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 20 || ESTATE OF E.R., et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00846-WBS-CKD 21 Plaintiffs, ORDER FOR FILING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT VS. 23 || COUNTY OF YUBA, et al., 24 Defendants. 25 26 The parties—the Estate of F.R. and Lori Rosiles (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and the County of 27 || Yuba and Yuba County Sheriff's Office (collectively, “Defendants”)—submit the following [Proposed] 28 || Order for Filing First Amended Complaint.

1 1. The parties previously stipulated that Plaintiffs shall have leave to file a First Amended 2 || Complaint, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). ECF No. 19. Thereafter, Plaintiffs filed 3 || the First Amended Complaint. ECF No. 20. Thus, the First Amended Complaint is the currently- 4 || operative pleading in this case. See, e.g., 6 Wright & Miller, Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 1490 (3d ed.) (Tf 5 || consent is secured, the usual motion procedure need not be followed. The pleaders right to amend is not 6 || subject to the courts discretion and the court must permit the amendment to be filed.”); Fern v. United States, 213 F.2d 674, 677 (9th Cir. 1954) (“Once the adverse party has consented to the amendment of a 8 || pleading, the court has no control over the matter under Rule 15(a).”); Bilmar Drilling, Inc. v. IFG 9 || Leasing Co., 795 F.2d 1194, 1199 (Sth Cir. 1986) (“if the adverse party had consented to amendment, the 10 || court has no control over the matter” (citing Fern, 213 F.2d at 677)). 11 2. The Court’s courtroom deputy has requested that the parties “e-file a proposed order to 12 || accompany th[e] stipulation, for the [JJudge’s review and consideration.” Accordingly, the parties submit 13 || the instant proposed order. 14 || Dated: April 12, 2024 Respectfully Submitted, 15 LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN /8/ Mark E. Merin 16 17 Mark E. Merin 18 Paul H. Masuhara 19 Attorneys for Plaintiffs ESTATE OF F.R. and LORI ROSILES 20 Dated: April 15, 2024 Respectfully Submitted, PORTER SCOTT 22 : 23 /s/ Matthew W. Gross (as authorized on April 15, 2024) 24 By: Carl L. Fessenden 25 Matthew W. Gross 26 Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF YUBA and YUBA COUNTY 27 SHERIFF’S OFFICE 28

1 ORDER 2 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, ECF No. 19, and the filing of Plaintiffs’ First Amended 3 || Complaint, ECF No. 20, Plaintiffs’ currently-operative pleading in this case is the First Amended Complaint, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6|| Dated: April 16, 2024 ty td. 4k. 1S. 7 WILLIAMB.SHUBB 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3