From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hillside Dairy, Inc. v. Kawamura

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 19, 2005
CIV-S-97-1179 GEB JFM, CIV-S-97-1185 GEB JFM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2005)

Opinion

CIV-S-97-1179 GEB JFM, CIV-S-97-1185 GEB JFM.

August 19, 2005

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General of the State of California.

Linda Berg, Deputy Attorney General, California Secretary of Food Agriculture, et al., Attorneys for Defendants.

John Foust, Thelen Reid Priest LLP, Hillside Dairy, Inc., et al., Attorneys for Plaintiffs.

John H. Vetne, Law Offices of John H. Vetne, Ponderosa Dairy, et al., Attorneys for Plaintiffs.

John Foust, Thelen Reid Priest LLP, Hillside Dairy, Inc., et al., Attorneys for Plaintiffs.


STIPULATION AND ORDER


IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the Parties, through their counsel of record, that:

RECITALS

WHEREAS, on May 11, 2004, Summary Judgment was Granted in favor of Plaintiffs;

WHEREAS, on May 11, 2004, Judgment was entered pursuant to the Order Granting Plaintiffs Summary Judgment ("Judgment");

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' Amended Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs ("Motion") was submitted on September 27, 2004;

WHEREAS, in the Motion, Plaintiffs stated: "Plaintiffs will submit a supplemental declaration to include their attorneys' fees expended in seeking fees as well as any other adjustment necessary to the total fee request";

WHEREAS, on August 13, 2004, the Parties Stipulated that "Plaintiffs will have to file yet at least one more supplemental declaration regarding the amount and nature of fees associated with the motion to stay, as well as preparing their reply in support of the Motion, and preparing for the September 27, 2004 hearing on the Motion";

WHEREAS, the Parties Stipulated and the Court Ordered on August 16, 2004, that Plaintiffs were permitted to submit — 30 days after the Court Grants the Motion — their First Supplemental Fee Request respecting those fees not included in the original Motion;

WHEREAS, on December 9, 2004, the Court entered its Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion;

WHEREAS, Defendants filed a Notice of Appeal of the May 11, 2004 Judgment;

WHEREAS, the parties met with the Ninth Circuit Mediator on December 17, 2004. At the end of the meeting the parties agreed to continue the mediation process by phone and in person during the next several weeks and in order to conserve judicial and party resources the parties jointly requested that the filing of Plaintiffs' First Supplemental Fee Request be postponed to March 30, 2005 and the Court granted their request on December 22, 2004;

WHEREAS, the parties had another in-person meeting with the Ninth Circuit Mediator on February 7, 2005. At the end of that meeting the parties agreed to continue the mediation process, which involved further discussions. In order to conserve judicial and party resources the parties jointly requested that the filing of Plaintiffs' First Supplemental Fee Request be postponed to June 10, 2005 and this Court granted that motion on February 11, 2005.

WHEREAS, the parties were continuing discussions beyond June 10, 2005 and again in order to conserve judicial and party resources the parties jointly requested that the filing of Plaintiffs' First Supplemental Fee Request be postponed to August 31, 2005 and this Court granted that motion on May 17, 2005.

WHEREAS, as part of the Ninth Circuit mediation process the parties have reached an agreement that would resolve the ongoing litigation. However, the agreement does not become final until certain fixed conditions precedent have been fulfilled. To give the parties time to bring about a final settlement and in order to conserve judicial and party resources, therefore, the parties again jointly request that the filing of Plaintiffs' First Supplemental Fee Request be postponed to October 14, 2005.

WHEREAS, by entering into this Stipulation, Plaintiffs' do not waive the right to file their First Supplemental Fee Request, and further supplemental materials should they be necessary, and Defendants do not waive their right to oppose any such request.

WHEREAS, this Stipulation is expressly conditioned upon and dependent upon the Court signing and entering this Stipulation as an Order; and THEREFORE:

STIPULATION ORDER

Plaintiffs are permitted to file their First Supplemental Fee Request on or before October 14, 2005; and THEREFORE:

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

I, John Foust, hereby attest that I have obtained the authorization of the attorney signatories to this document to electronically sign on their behalf.

AS STIPULATED, IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Hillside Dairy, Inc. v. Kawamura

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 19, 2005
CIV-S-97-1179 GEB JFM, CIV-S-97-1185 GEB JFM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2005)
Case details for

Hillside Dairy, Inc. v. Kawamura

Case Details

Full title:HILLSIDE DAIRY, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. A.G. KAWAMURA, Secretary…

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

Date published: Aug 19, 2005

Citations

CIV-S-97-1179 GEB JFM, CIV-S-97-1185 GEB JFM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2005)