G. v. Tulare County

District Court, E.D. California·Decided March 5, 2024·No. 1:23-cv-00500·Unknown

Opinion

T. Kennedy Helm, IV (SBN 282319) Kevin G. Little (SBN 149818) HELM LAW OFFICE, PC Michelle L. Tostenrude (SBN 290121) 644 40th Street, Suite 305 LAW OFFICE OF KEVIN G. LITTLE Oakland, California 94609 Post Office Box 8656 Telephone: (510) 350-7517 Fresno, California 93747 Facsimile: (510) 350-7359 Telephone: (559) 342-5800 E-mail: kennedy@helmlawoffice.com Facsimile: (559) 242-2400 E-Mail: kevin@kevinglittle.com Attorney for Plaintiffs A.G. and F.G., by and through their guardian ad litem, Johana Yolanda Corral Galvan Attorneys for Plaintiff Rosa Madrid

Gary L. Logan (SBN 90558) Lindsey M. Romano (SBN 337600) Alan J. Mish (SBN 105771 GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP LAW OFFICES OF 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 LEBEAU • THELEN, LLP San Francisco, CA 94111 5001 East Commercenter Drive, Suite 300 Telephone: (415) 875-4126 Post Office Box 12092 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054 Bakersfield, California 93389-2092 E-mail: lromano@grsm.com Telephone:(661) 325-8962 Facsimile: (661) 325-1127 Attorneys for Defendants Wellpath, LLC; Alla E-mail: glogan@lebeauthelen.com Liberstein, M.D.; and Andrew P. Ho, M.D. E-mail: amish@lebeauthelen.com

Attorneys for Defendants County of Tulare, Jose Sanchez Perez, James Dillon, and Rodrigo DeOchoa UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION A.G., a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem ) Case No. 1:23-cv-00500-JLT-SKO Johana Yolanda Corral Galvan, individually and as co- ) Case No. 1:24-cv-00150-JLT-SKO successor in interest to Decedent Francisco Ponce, Jr.; ) F.G., a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem ) STIPULATION AND ORDER TO: (1) Johana Yolanda Corral Galvan, individually and as co- ) CONSOLIDATE CASES PURSUANT TO successor in interest to Decedent Francisco Ponce, Jr.; ) FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE individually, ) 42(a); AND (2) MODIFY EXISTING ) SCHEDULING ORDER (Doc. 19) Plaintiffs, ) vs. ) ) COUNTY OF TULARE, a public entity; Correctional ) Deputy Trainee JOSE SANCHEZ PEREZ; ) Correctional Deputy JAMES DILLON; Correctional ) Deputy RODRIGO DEOCHOA; WELLPATH, LLC, a ) Delaware Corporation; ANDREW P. HO, MD; ALLA ) LIBERSTEIN, MD; and DOES 7–50, jointly and ) severally, ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs A.G. and F.G., by and through their counsel, T. Kennedy Helm, IV, of Helm Law Office, PC; Plaintiff Rosa Madrid, by and through her counsel, Kevin G. Little of the Law Office of Kevin G. Little; Defendants County of Tulare, Jose Sanchez Perez, James Dillon, and Rodrigo DeOchoa, by and through their counsel, Gary L. Logan, of Lebeau Thelen, LLP; and Defendants Wellpath, LLC; Andrew P. Ho, M.D.; and Alla Liberstein, M.D., by and through their counsel Lindsey M. Romano of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP, having met and conferred, hereby respectfully stipulate and request as follows: RECITALS A. On December 6, 2023, this Court issued an order granting the Parties’ stipulation for Plaintiffs to file a First Amended Complaint in A.G., et al. v. County of Tulare, et al., No. 1:23-cv-00500-JLT-SKO. See ECF No. 23. B. The First Amended Complaint, filed December 6, 2023, added Tulare County defendants Jose Sanchez Perez, James Dillon, and Rodrigo DeOchoa, and it also added defendants Wellpath, LLC, and its employees Andrew P. Ho, M.D., and Alla Liberstein, M.D. See ECF No. 24. C. On December 27, 2023, Defendants Tulare County, Perez, Dillon, and DeOchoa answered the First Amended Complaint. See ECF No. 27. D. On February 2, 2024, Plaintiff Rosa Madrid filed a Complaint against Defendants Jose Sanchez Perez, James Dillon, and Rodrigo DeOchoa arising out of the same incident as in A.G., the in-custody death of Francisco Ponce, Jr., See Rosa Madrid v. Sanchez-Perez, et al., No. 1:24-cv-00150-HBK, at ECF No. 1. Counsel for Plaintiff Madrid also filed a Notice of Related Cases regarding this case. See ECF No. 3 in Madrid. E. On February 5, 2024, the A.G. Plaintiffs served the First Amended Complaint on defendants Wellpath, LLC and Alla Liberstein, M.D. See ECF Nos. 28, 29. The responsive pleading date was February 26, 2024. F. On February 20, 2024, the same counsel for Defendants Sanchez Perez, Dillon, and DeOchoa as in A.G. filed an answer to Plaintiff’s complaint in Madrid. See ECF No. 7. G. On February 21, 2024, the A.G. Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Related Cases regarding Madrid. See ECF No. 30. H. On February 23, 2024, counsel for Defendants Wellpath, LLC; Alla Liberstein, M.D.; and Andrew P. Ho, M.D.; filed a notice of appearance in A.G. See ECF no. 31. I. Also on February 23, 2024, counsel for the Wellpath defendants and counsel for Plaintiffs in A.G., after meeting and conferring, filed a stipulation pursuant to Eastern District Local Rule 144(a) that the Wellpath defendants would file a responsive pleading to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint by March 25, 2024. See ECF No. 34. J. Also on February 23, 2024, Plaintiffs served the First Amended Complaint on defendant Dr. Ho. See ECF No. 35. K. Also on February 23, 2024, District Judge Thurston entered an order relating Madrid to A.G. and reassigning both cases to District Judge Thurston and this Court. See ECF No. 8 in Madrid. L. Also on February 23, 2024, this Court reset a scheduling conference in Madrid for May 14, 2024. See ECF No. 9 in Madrid. M. The Parties agree that the cases of A.G., et al. v. County of Tulare, et al., No. 1:23-cv- 00500-JLT-SKO and Madrid v. Sanchez-Perez, et al., No. 1:24-cv-00150-JLT-SKO, “involve overlapping parties, claims, events and/or questions of factor law. Both actions concern the death of Francisco Ponce, Jr., while confined in the Bob Wiley Detention Facility.” See ECF No. 8 in Madrid. The Plaintiffs in A.G. are Mr. Ponce’s two minor daughters and co-successors in interest, and the Plaintiff in Madrid is Mr. Ponce’s mother. N. The Parties also agree that these cases should be consolidated, Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a), for discovery, pretrial, and trial, proceeding under one Scheduling Order. O. Therefore, the Parties stipulate and request that the cases be consolidated, and that the current scheduling order in A.G., ECF No. 19, be modified. P. When an act must be done within a specified time, the Court may, for good cause, extend the time with or without motion if the court acts, or a request is made, before the original time expires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A). With respect to an order setting forth the Court’s pretrial schedule, the “court may modify the pretrial schedule ‘if it cannot be reasonably met despite the diligence of the party seeking the amendment.’” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). The Parties respectfully submit that good cause exists to continue the deadline for completion of fact discovery and the successive deadlines. Q. Currently, the cutoff for non-expert discovery in A.G. is May 8, 2024. See ECF No. 19. R. Counsel for the A.G. Plaintiffs, counsel for the Tulare County Defendants, and counsel for the Wellpath Defendants have met-and-conferred and do not believe that fact discovery can be completed in A.G. by the current deadline of May 8, 2024, because the Wellpath Defendants will file their responsive pleading by March 25, 2024. S. Therefore, the A.G. Parties have agreed that a stipulated extension of approximately 180 days of the cutoff for fact discovery will allow the Parties to complete fact discovery. T. The A.G. Parties have further agreed that such a stipulated extension of 180 days of the cutoff for fact discovery would necessitate an approximate 180-day extension of each of the remaining pretrial dates, and of the trial date. U. Should Madrid be consolidated with A.G., then counsel for Plaintiff in Madrid

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

G. v. Tulare County, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

G. v. Tulare County (G. v. Tulare County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related