From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Watson v. United States

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jan 15, 2015
2:14-cv-01831-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2015)

Opinion

          BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney GREGORY T. BRODERICK Assistant United States Attorney JOHN P. HALLISSY Attorney for Defendant Joshua Christensen


          STIPULATION AND ORDER

          John A. Mendez United States District Court Judge

         Defendant Joshua Christensen has reached a settlement with Plaintiffs and filed a motion for approval of that settlement. (See Dkt. No. 20). The United States is not opposed to the motion, so long as Mr. Christensen remains available for deposition and for trial testimony. He is willing to remain subject to this Court's jurisdiction for those purposes, so long as his travel and lodging expenses are covered because he lives in North Carolina. Therefore, the parties stipulate that the United States will not oppose the pending motion, and Christensen will remain subject to the jurisdiction of this Court for the above- purposes. If subpoenaed, his travel and lodging shall be handled by the party or parties seeking his testimony. Respectfully submitted,

         ORDER

         GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

         1. If the United States does not oppose Defendant Joshua Christensen's pending settlement motion (Dkt. No. 20), he shall remain subject to this Court's jurisdiction for purposes of deposition and trial subpoenas even after he is dismissed as a party;

         2. The party or parties seeking Christensen's testimony shall arrange for his travel and lodging at reasonable expense.

         IT IS SO ORDERED


Summaries of

Watson v. United States

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jan 15, 2015
2:14-cv-01831-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2015)
Case details for

Watson v. United States

Case Details

Full title:ZHANNA WATSON AND GRACE WATSON, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jan 15, 2015

Citations

2:14-cv-01831-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2015)