McCoy v. City of Vallejo

City Attorney, State Bar No. 140001

RANDY J. RISNER

Chief Assistant City Attorney, State Bar No. 172552

KATELYN M. KNIGHT

Assistant City Attorney, State Bar No. 264573

CITY OF VALLEJO, City Hall

555 Santa Clara Street

Vallejo, California 94590

Telephone: (707) 648-4545

Facsimile: (707) 648-4687

Email: [email protected]

MICHAEL G. COLANTUONO, State Bar No. 143551

[email protected]

ANDREW C. RAWCLIFFE, State Bar No. 259224

[email protected]

NIKHIL S. DAMLE, State Bar No. 297350

[email protected]

COLANTUONO, HIGHSMITH & WHATLEY, PC

420 Sierra College Drive, Suite 140

Grass Valley, California 95945-5091

Telephone: (530) 432-7357

Facsimile: (530) 432-7356

Attorneys for Defendants

CITY OF VALLEJO, ANDREW BIDOU, GREG NYHOFF,

MARK THOMPSON, BRYAN GLICK, ANTHONY

ROMERO-CANO, COLIN EATON, JORDON PATZER,

STEVEN DARDEN, AND KYLE WYLIE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KORI MCCOY, etc., et al., CASE NO.: 2:19-cv-01191-JAM-CKD

Plaintiffs, STIPULATION ON DISMISSAL OF v. PLAINTIFFS’ INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY BANE ACT CLAIMS UNDER THE FIFTH CITY OF VALLEJO, etc., et al., CAUSE OF ACTION

Complaint Filed: June 27, 2019 Defendants. SAC Filed: March 26, 2021 Trial Date: August 29, 2022

McCoy, Shawnmell Mitchell, Marquita McCoy, and Barbara Dorsey (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants City of Vallejo, Andrew Bidou, Mark Thompson, Bryan Glick, Anthony Romero-Cano, Colin Eaton, Jordon Patzer, Steven Darden, Kyle Wylie and Ryan McMahon (“Defendants”1), referred to collectively as the “Parties,” by and through their designated counsel, that: WHEREAS, on September 9, 2021, the Parties held a meet and confer in compliance with section III of the Order re Filing Requirements, ECF No. 4-2, in anticipation of Defendants moving under Rule 12(c) to dismiss various causes of action pleaded in Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint’s (“SAC”) for their failure to state a claim.

WHEREAS, the Parties agreed during that meet and confer that Plaintiffs Kori McCoy, Marc McCoy, Louis McCoy, Shawnmell Mitchell, Marquita McCoy, and Barbara Dorsey cannot pursue individual capacity claims under the California Civil Code section 52.1 (Bane Act). Bay Area Rapid Transit Dist. v. Superior Court, 38 Cal.App.4th 141, 144–145 (1995) (BART) WHEREAS, the Parties agreed that Plaintiffs Kori McCoy, Marc McCoy, Louis McCoy, Shawnmell Mitchell, and Barbara Dorsey2 would voluntarily dismiss with prejudice their Bane Act claims (Cal. Civ. Code, § 52.1), which were brought in their individual capacity under the Fifth Cause of Action in the SAC and will not further pursue this claim for money, damages or penalties on their own behalf, except those sought as a successor-interest to decedent Willie McCoy. NOW THEREFORE, the Parties, through their undersigned counsel below, hereby stipulate and agree:

1. Plaintiffs Kori McCoy’s, Marc McCoy’s, Louis McCoy’s, Shawnmell Mitchell’s, and Barbara Dorsey’s state law claims for Bane Act violations (Cal. Civ. Code, § 52.1), which are brought in their individual capacity, under the Fifth Cause of Action in Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint are dismissed with prejudice.

Defendant Ryan McMahon is represented separately by the law firm Angelo, Killday and Kilduff. 2 Plaintiff Marquita McCoy’s Bane Act claim was previously dismissed by stipulation for failure to file a timely government claim for damages. See Dkt. No. 97.

/s/ Andrew C. Rawcliffe

ANDREW C. RAWCLIFFE

Attorneys for Defendants

City of Vallejo, Andrew Bidou, Greg Nyhoff, Mark Thompson, Bryan Glick, Anthony Romero-Cano, Colin Eaton, Jordon Patzer, Steven Darden, and Kyle Wylie

DATED: November 1, 2021

/s/ Derick E. Konz

DERICK E. KONZ

Attorneys for Defendant Ryan McMahon

DATED: November 1, 2021

/s/ Patrick M. Buelna

PATRICK M. BUELNA

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 1, 2021 /s/ John A. Mendez

THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE