R.S. v. County of Stanislaus

Opinion

Dale K. Galipo, Esq. (Bar No. 144074) Jaime A. Leanos, Esq. (Bar No. 159471) dalekgalipo@yahoo.com jleanoslaw@pacbell.net Renee Masongsong (Bar No. 281819) 75 E. Santa Clara St., Suite 250 rvalentine@galipolaw.com San Jose, CA 95113 21800 Burbank Boulevard, Suite 310 Telephone: (408) 294-6800 Woodland Hills, California 91367 Facsimile: (408) 294-7102 Tel: (818) 347-3333 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Fax: (818)347-4118 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11341 Gold Express Drive, Ste. 160 Gold River, California 95670 Tel: 916-922-1200 Fax: 916-922-1303 Shanan L. Hewitt, SBN 200168 SHewitt@rhplawyers.com Jonathan B. Paul, SBN 215884 JPaul@rhplawyers.com Attorney for Defendants,

R.S., a minor, by and through his guardian ad ) CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-01170-DAD-SKO litem Jessica Moreno, individually and as ) successor in interest to Rudy Santillan, Sr., ) JOINT STIPULATION TO AMEND deceased, and JORGE VICENTE, ) SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINE individually, ) TO FILE MOTIONS OR ) STIPULATIONS TO AMEND Plaintiffs, ) PLEADINGS; ORDER v. ) ) (Doc. 16) County of Stanislaus; Dany Anderson; Miguel ) Garcia; Eric Torres; Dustin Willey; Alberto ) Navarro; Eric Garcia; Benjamin Carnes; Barry ) Balance; Morin Yom; Colton Hughes; Robert ) Domingos and DOES 1-20 10, inclusive, ) ) Defendants. ) Plaintiffs, by and through their counsel Dale K. Galipo, Esq. and Renee Masongsong, Esq. of the Law Offices of Dale K. Galipo and Jaime A. Leanos of the Law Office of Morales & Leanos and Defendant County of Stanislaus, by and through counsel Shanan L. Hewitt, Esq. and Jonathan B. Paul, Esq. of the Law Offices of Rivera Hewitt Paul LLP, collectively referred to as “the Parties,” hereby request that the deadline for filing of motions or stipulations requesting leave to amend the pleadings, as set forth in the Scheduling Order of January 8, 2021 (Doc. 15), be extended to October 1, 2021. IT IS STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN the Parties, through their attorneys of record (identified in the signature blocks below), as follows: (1) Plaintiffs JORGE VICENTE, and minor R.S. through his guardian ad litem Jessica Moreno, initiated this lawsuit on August 19, 2020 (Doc. 1) alleging federal and state law claims based on the death of Rudy Santillan, Sr. (2) The Parties stipulated to an extension of time to file a responsive pleading pursuant to Eastern District Local Rule 144(a) (Doc. 10), and Defendants COUNTY OF STANISLAUS, DANNY ANDERSON, MIGUEL GARCIA, ERIC TORRES, DUSTIN WILLEY, ALBERTO NAVARRO, ERIC GARCIA, BENJAMIN CARNES, BARRY BALANCE, MORIN YOM, COLTON HUGHES, and ROBERT DOMINGOS subsequently file their answer on November 19, 2020 (Doc. 12). (3) The Court issued the Scheduling Order on January 8, 2021 (Doc. 15). Under the terms of the Scheduling Order, August 2, 2021 is the current deadline to file motions or stipulations requesting to amend the pleadings. (Doc. 15, p. 2:25-26.) (4) The Parties continue to work diligently in this case by propounding and responding to written discovery. (5) Defendants have recently obtained information that additional heirs to Decedent Rudy Santillan Sr. may exist, and propounded written discovery to Plaintiffs to obtain further information regarding this matter. Plaintiffs recently requested and were granted an extension of time to respond to said discovery up to and including September 10, 2021. (6) The Parties request additional time for amendments to the pleadings, to determine whether any additional heirs exist that should be joined to this action pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 19. Moreover, under California law, all heirs are necessary parties and “plaintiff heirs have a mandatory duty to join all known omitted heirs in the ‘single action’ for wrongful death. If an heir refuses to participate in the suit as a plaintiff, he or she may be named as a defendant so that all heirs are before the court in the same action. An heir named as a defendant in a wrongful death action is, in reality, a plaintiff.” Ruttenberg v. Ruttenberg, 53 Cal.App.4th 801, 808 (1997); see also G.M. v. Poole (E.D. Cal., Sept. 12, 2019, No. 2:17-cv-02415-TLN-CKD) 2019 WL 4318573, *3-5, citing Ruttenberg v. Ruttenberg, 53 Cal.App.4th 801. (7) The Parties wish to amend the current Scheduling Order deadline for filing of motions or stipulations requesting leave to amend the pleadings in order to provide them with sufficient time to ascertain through discovery whether such amendment(s) will be necessary. (8) Under these circumstances, the Parties have agreed and respectfully request that the Court amend the deadline in the Scheduling Order to facilitate the above stipulation as follows: EVENT CURRENT PROPOSED Last Day to file motion or stipulations to 8/02/2021 10/01/2021 amend the pleadings

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: August 2, 2021 LAW OFFICES OF DALE K. GALIPO /s/Renee Masongsong (As authorized on 08-02-21) RENEE MASONGSONG Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: August 2, 2021 MORALES & LEANOS

/s/Jaime Leanos (As authorized on 08-02-21) JAIME LEANOS Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dated: August 2, 2021 RIVERA HEWITT PAUL LLP

/s/ Jonathan B. Paul JONATHAN B. PAUL Attorneys for Defendants

Good cause having been shown, the parties’ above stipulated request for an extension of time to file and serve motions or stipulations requesting leave to amend the pleadings (Doc. 16) is HEREBY GRANTED. The parties shall file and serve motions or stipulations requesting leave to amend the pleadings by no later than October 1, 2021. All other dates in the Scheduling Order (Doc. 15) shall remain as set.

Dated: August 3, 2021 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE