Reynolds v. San Diego, County of
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- John A. Houston (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint request to extend the stay of proceedings pending the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on a petition for certiorari in a related case. The court granted the request, vacated the scheduled telephonic status conference, and reset it for January 27, 2020.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Grant joint request to extend stay of proceedings and reset telephonic status conference“the Court finds good cause to VACATE the telephonic hearing set for September 9, 2019 and RESET it for January 27, 2020 at 2:30 p.m.” | agree with court The court exercised its inherent authority to manage its docket and stay proceedings. The order recites that the parties filed a joint request and that there is 'good cause' due to the pending Supreme Court petition in a related case (Mann v. County of San Diego). This is a standard procedural mechanism to avoid duplicative or premature litigation while a controlling legal issue is being resolved by a higher court. The decision follows logically from the recited facts and the court's case management powers. |
The order itself: sound — The order is a routine procedural scheduling order. It correctly identifies the basis for the stay (pending Supreme Court review of a related case) and exercises the court's inherent case management authority. It does not address substantive legal claims or apply specific legal standards to the merits, which is appropriate for a stay order.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 TREVOR REYNOLDS; HEATHER Case No.: 11cv1256-JAH (AGS) REYNOLDS; H.R., a minor; R.R., a 11 minor – by and through their Guardian Ad ORDER GRANTING JOINT 12 Litem, Janice White, REQUEST TO EXTEND STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND RESETTING 13 Plaintiffs, TELEPHONIC STATUS 14 v. CONFERENCE 15 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, SAN DIEGO COUNTY HEALTH AND 16 HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY; 17 POLINSKY CHILDRENS CENTER; MAYA BRYSON; SHARI MEDEIROS; 18 LAURA ZETMEIR, and Does 1 through 19 50, Inclusive, 20 Defendants. 21 22 Plaintiffs Trevor Reynolds, Heather Reynolds, H.R., a minor, and R.R., also a minor, 23 both through their guardian ad litem, Kirk Howland (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), and 24 Defendants County of San Diego, Maya Bryson, Shari Medeiros, Laura Zetmeir, Cheryl 25 Berglund, and Kristie Campbell (collectively, “Defendants”), by and through their 26 respective counsel filed a joint status report, pursuant to the Court’s May10, 2019 Order, 27 along with a request to stay proceedings for an additional three-month period. Pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s final decision and ruling on Defendants’ Petition Writ of Certiorari in Mann v. County of San Diego, 907 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir.2018), the || Court finds good cause to VACATE the telephonic hearing set for September 9, 2019 and || RESET it for January 27, 2020 at 2:30 p.m. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint status report on or || before January 21, 2020.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
|} DATED: September 5, 2019 ON. JOHN A. HOUSTON JUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Cites, in this corpus
- Mark Mann v. County of San Diego 16-56657 · 2018-10-31