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

Opinion

Mark E. Merin (State Bar No. 043849) Paul H. Masuhara (State Bar No. 289805) LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN 1010 F Street, Suite 300 Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: (916) 443-6911 Facsimile: (916) 447-8336 E-Mail: mark @markmerin.com paul @markmerin.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs ESTATE OF F.R. and LORI ROSILES PORTER | SCOTT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Carl L. Fessenden, SBN 161494 Matthew W. Gross, SBN 324007 2180 Harvard Street, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95815 TEL: 916.929.1481 FAX: 916.927.3706 cfessenden@ porterscott.com Mgross @ porterscott.com Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF YUBA and YUBA COUNTY ESTATE OF E.R., et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00846-WBS-CKD Plaintiffs, ORDER FOR FILING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT VS. COUNTY OF YUBA, et al., Defendants. The parties—the Estate of F.R. and Lori Rosiles (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and the County of Yuba and Yuba County Sheriff's Office (collectively, “Defendants”)—submit the following [Proposed] Order for Filing First Amended Complaint.

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

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, ECF No. 19, and the filing of Plaintiffs’ First Amended 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). Dated: April 16, 2024 ty td. 4k. 1S. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE