Smith v. Diaz
Opinion
Attorney General of California Supervising Deputy Attorney General Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 190819 600 West Broadway, Suite 1800 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 738-9061 Fax: (916) 732-7920 E-mail: Eric.Miersma@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Defendants M. Bloise, R. Diaz, R. Feston, M. Taylor, R. Davis, Y.Franco, and T. Duke IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION C.JAY SMITH, et al., 4:20-cv-04335-HSG Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND REQUEST BY BOTH PARTIES TO VACATE ALBINO v. EVIDENTIARY HEARING AND RELATED DATES AND SET TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE; ORDER (as R.DIAZ, et al., modified) Defendants. Judge: Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Trial Date: None Set Action Filed: June 29, 2020 The parties respectfully submit this Stipulation and Request by both Parties to Vacate the Albino Evidentiary Hearing and Related Dates and Set Trial Setting Conference, and Order regarding same. This Stipulation and Request is based on the following: WHEREAS, an Albino evidentiary hearing is scheduled before this Court for June 30, 2025, and July 1, 2025. WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion on June 18, 2025, in the case Perttu v. Richards, No. 23-1324, 605 U.S. ______ (2025), 2025 U.S. LEXIS 2380, that directly affects factual and legal issues that were to be determined in the evidentiary hearing. WHEREAS, the Court has ordered the parties to submit briefing on whether the question of exhaustion in this case is intertwined with the merits of Plaintiff’s claims such that a jury trial is required under Perttu v. Richards, No. 23-1324, and the evidentiary hearing should be vacated (ECF No. 170). WHEREAS, the parties agree that the factual issues regarding exhaustion are intertwined with the factual issues regarding the merits of Plaintiff’s claims. WHEREAS, the parties agree that all pending factual issues to be decided at the evidentiary hearing should be included in a jury trial in this matter. WHEREAS, the parties agree that the evidentiary hearing and all related dates should be vacated, and a Trial Setting Conference should be set by the Court. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND REQUESTED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, and subject to Court approval, that the June 30, 2025, and July 1, 2025, evidentiary hearing and all related dates be vacated, that all pending issues to be heard at the evidentiary hearing be included in a jury trial in this matter, and that the Court should set a Trial Setting Conference. Dated: December 9, 2024 Orthwein Law, PC By: /s/Jennifer Orthwein Jennifer Orthwein Attorneys for Plaintiff C. Jay Smith Dated: December 9, 2024 CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE By: /s/Eric Miersma Eric Miersma, Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants SA2021400482 85204279.docx I hereby attest that all other signatories listed, whose signatures are indicated by a conformed signature (“/s/”), and on whose behalf this filing is submitted, concur in the filing’s content and have authorized the filing. Dated: June 20, 2025 CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE By: /s/Eric Miersma Eric Miersma, Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants Having read and considered the Stipulation, Good Cause appearing, the Court grants the parties’ request and vacates the June 30, 2025, and July 1, 2025, evidentiary hearing and all related dates, directs that all pending issues to be heard at the evidentiary hearing be included in ajury trial in this matter. A Case Management Conference via a Zoom webinar is set for July 1, 2025 before Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., at 2:00 p.m. No case management statement is due. All attorneys and pro se litigants appearing for the case management conference are required to g || join at least 15 minutes before the hearing to check-in with the CRD. The Zoom information is: g || https://canduscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1607976056?pwd=aW SleE14UkJRbkdPTGJFWFUrRG1Cdz09 Webinar ID: 160 797 6056/Passcode: 129759. It is so ordered. DATED: 6/24/2025 Ne HAitoravbiTe Haywood’S. Gritta/r. °
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Smith v. Diaz (Smith v. Diaz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.