The Estate of Raymond Vogelman v. County of San Diego
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The court considered the parties' joint motion to stay proceedings and toll statutes of limitations pending the conclusion of a homicide investigation. The court granted the motion, ordered a stay, tolled limitations periods for Doe defendants, and terminated the pending motion to dismiss.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Granting the parties' joint motion to stay proceedings and toll statutes of limitations“Therefore, the Joint Motion is hereby GRANTED. (ECF No. 15.)” | agree with court The court correctly applied the discretionary standard for staying proceedings, citing *Lockyer* and *Landis*. The factual basis—that the case principally concerns the circumstances of the decedent's death which are under criminal investigation—supports the finding that a stay is efficient and fair. |
Terminating the pending Motion to Dismiss“The Court TERMINATES the pending Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10).” | agree with court Terminating a motion without prejudice to allow it to be refiled or reinstated after a stay is a standard procedural mechanism to manage the docket and avoid ruling on issues that may become moot or factually different after the investigation concludes. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly identifies the legal standard for a stay of proceedings and applies it to the specific facts that the civil case depends on the outcome of a pending criminal investigation. The procedural orders regarding tolling and status reports are appropriate safeguards.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 THE ESTATE OF RAYMOND Case No. 24-cv-0234-BAS-MMP VOGELMAN, by and through its 14 successor-in-interest J. Leslie Crawford; ORDER GRANTING PARTIES’ 15 and J. LESLIE CRAWFORD, JOINT MOTION (ECF No. 15)
16 Plaintiffs, 17 v. 18 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, ANTHONY RAY, WILLIAM GORE, and DOES 1– 19 31, 20 Defendants. 21 22 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion for an Order Staying Proceedings and 23 Tolling the Statutes of Limitations Pending the Conclusion of the Homicide Investigation 24 of Decedent’s Death (“Joint Motion”). (ECF No. 15.) In their Joint Motion, the parties 25 request the Court stay the case while a criminal investigation into the decedent’s death is 26 pending. (Id.) 27 “A district court has discretionary power to stay proceedings in its own court.” 28 Lockyer v. Mirant, 398 F.3d 1098, 1109 (9th Cir. 2005) (citing Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 1 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)). “[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent 2 in every court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time 3 and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis, 299 U.S. at 254. “A trial court 4 may, with propriety, find it is efficient for its own docket and the fairest course for the 5 parties to enter a stay of an action before it, pending resolution of independent proceedings 6 which bear upon the case.” Leyva v. Certified Grocers of Calif., 593 F.2d 857, 863 (9th 7 Cir. 1979). 8 The Court finds a stay in this case is appropriate and effective in conserving time 9 and effort for itself and the parties while the investigation is in progress because the case 10 principally concerns the circumstances of the decedent’s death. Therefore, the Joint 11 Motion is hereby GRANTED. (ECF No. 15.) The Court accordingly orders as follows: 12 1. All proceedings in this matter shall be STAYED pending the conclusion 13 of the homicide investigation of the decedent’s death; 14 2. The statutes of limitations as to the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims and any state 15 law claims as provided for in California Code of Civil Procedure section 16 335.1, are tolled as to the Doe defendants, from the date of this order, until 17 such time as the stay is lifted; 18 3. Defendants retain all rights to raise any issue regarding compliance with 19 the California Government Claims Act, without prejudice; 20 4. Defendants will notify Plaintiffs within 10 days of the conclusion of the 21 homicide investigation and the parties will provide a joint status report to 22 the Court; 23 5. While the investigation is pending, the parties will jointly file a status 24 update with the Court every six months while the stay is in place. The first 25 status update is due on or before January 3, 2025. Subsequent status 26 updates are to be filed every six months thereafter. 27 28 I 6. The Court TERMINATES the pending Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10). 2 Upon conclusion of the stay, the Court will reinstate or direct Defendants 3 to refile the Motion to Dismiss. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 A , 6 || DATED: July 2, 2024 Ypilag (Lyohaa 6 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28