Opinion
1:20-cv-00379-EPG (PC)
06-15-2021
ERIN LYNN PETERSON, Plaintiff, v. DR. VISHAL MANHAS, Defendant.
ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION IN PART (ECF NO. 45)
On May 14, 2021, the parties filed a stipulation and proposed order. (ECF No. 45). In the stipulation, the parties state that they “desire and stipulate to amend or modify the Complaint to name the CDCR in lieu of Manhas, and to deem Manhas omitted from the Complaint, thereby operating to dismiss Manhas.” (Id. at 2). The parties “further agree and stipulate that the answer filed in this case shall be deemed to have been made on behalf of the CDCR.” (Id.). “The Parties further agree and stipulate that the amendment or modification to the Complaint may be made by interlineation on the original complaint and any other documents deemed necessary by the District Court clerk.” (Id.).
“The Parties further agree that this Stipulation and Agreement may be signed in counterparts, and may be signed and/or transmitted electronically, including by e-mail or facsimile, and that any such document deemed to be effective and binding.” (Id.).
“The Parties further agree to execute any additional documents the Court may require to carry out the Parties' intentions and requests.” (Id.).
“The Parties further agree that each signature is made with the authorization and agreement of the individual or entity identified.” (Id.).
In the proposed order, the parties request that the order be made nunc pro tunc. (Id. at 4).
The stipulation will be approved, except to the extent the parties request:) that the answer be deemed submitted on behalf of the CDCR; 2) that the changes be deemed made nunc pro tunc; and 3) that the Clerk make interlineations on the complaint and other documents as necessary. The first two will not be approved because the parties have cited to no legal authority allowing the Court to deem an answer submitted on behalf of a different party or allowing the requested changes to be made nunc pro tunc J As to the third, if the parties believe that changes to the complaint or other documents are necessary, they can stipulate to the filing of, and file, amended documents.
If the parties believe either of these terms are material, they have fourteen days from the date of service of this order to file a brief in support of these terms.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The parties' stipulation (ECF No. 45) is approved, except to the extent the parties request: 1) that the answer be deemed submitted on behalf of the CDCR; 2) that the changes be deemed made nunc pro tunc; and 3) that the Clerk make interlineations on the complaint and other documents as necessary.
2. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is substituted in place of Vishal Manhas.
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to reflect the dismissal of defendant Vishal Manhas on the Court's docket and to add defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.