Hall v. Placer County Sheriff's Department

Full title: JAMA A. HALL, Plaintiff, v. PLACER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT; OFFICER…

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

Date published: Feb 17, 2011

No. CIV S-10-1152 JAM EFB PS (E.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2011)

Opinion

JAMA A. HALL, Plaintiff, v. PLACER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT; OFFICER ZENDER, BADGE Defendants. No. CIV S-10-1152 JAM EFB PS United States District Court, E.D. California. February 17, 2011

          ORDER

          EDMUND F. BRENNAN, District Judge.

         This case is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On January 13, 2011, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint and noticed the motion for hearing on February 16, 2011. Dckt. No. 26. However, on February 1, 2011, plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time to file an opposition to defendants' motion. Dckt. No. 27. Therefore, the undersigned issued an order on February 3, 2011 continuing the hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss to March 9, 2011 and continuing the status conference that was also scheduled for February 16, 2011 to May 18, 2011. Dckt. No. 29.

         On February 10, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion to continue the February 16, 2011 status conference. Dckt. No. 30. However, because that status conference was already continued, plaintiff's motion to continue will be denied as moot.

         Additionally, on February 10, 2011, plaintiff filed an opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss, along with a motion to amend her complaint and a proposed amended complaint. Dckt. Nos. 31, 32, 33. Plaintiff noticed her motion to amend for hearing on February 16, 2011. Dckt. No. 32. However, Local Rule 230(e) provides that related or counter-motions "shall be served and filed in the manner and on the date prescribed for the filing of opposition" and assumes that, unless the court finds that a continuance is warranted, related motions will be heard on the same day as the original motion. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(e) ("Any counter-motion or other motion that a party may desire to make that is related to the general subject matter of the original motion shall be served and filed in the manner and on the date prescribed for the filing of opposition. If a counter-motion or other related motion is filed, the Court may continue the hearing on the original and all related motions so as to give all parties reasonable opportunity to serve and file oppositions and replies to all pending motions."). Here, because a continuance of the March 9, 2011 hearing date appears unnecessary, both motions (i.e., plaintiff's motion to amend and defendants' motion to dismiss) will be heard on that date.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. Plaintiff's motion to continue, Dckt. No. 30, is denied as moot.

         2. Plaintiff's motion to amend, Dckt. No. 32, will be heard on March 9, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 24, along with defendants' motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 26.

         3. On or before February 23, 2011, defendants shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to plaintiff's motion to amend.

         4. On or before March 2, 2011, plaintiff may file a reply to any opposition filed by defendants.

         5. On or before March 2, 2011, defendants may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss.