State of California v. Phillip Del Rosa, et al.

No. 2:23-cv-00743-KJM-SCR (E.D. Cal. May 16, 2025) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · May 19, 2025 · No. No. 2:23-cv-00743-KJM-SCR

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denies defendants’ motion to stay proceedings pending their interlocutory appeal concerning qualified immunity. The court holds that the automatic stay applies only to the PACT Act claims implicated by the appeal, not to the CCTA and civil RICO claims against defendants in their personal capacities. The court also directs the clerk to remove Wendy Del Rosa from the caption and orders the parties to file a joint pretrial scheduling statement.

Holdings

  1. The automatic stay applied only to questions related to California's PACT Act claims because those were the only claims addressed by the appealed order and defendants had not asserted or obtained a ruling on qualified immunity as to the CCTA or civil RICO claims.
  2. The motion to stay the proceedings was denied.

Questions Presented

  1. What claims and issues were subject to the automatic stay resulting from defendants' interlocutory appeal of the denial of qualified immunity?
  2. Whether the district court should stay the remaining proceedings, including the CCTA and civil RICO claims, pending resolution of the interlocutory appeal.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (9)

  • Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526, 530 (1985)(followed)
  • Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982)(followed)
  • United States v. Pitner, 307 F.3d 1178, 1183 n.5 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
  • Plotkin v. Pac. Tel. & Tel. Co., 688 F.2d 1291, 1293 (9th Cir. 1982)(followed)
  • Alice L. v. Dusek, 492 F.3d 563, 564-65 (5th Cir. 2007)(followed)
  • Andrade Rico v. Beard, No. 17-1402, 2019 WL 4127206, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2019)(followed)
  • Cabral v. Cnty. of Glenn, No. 0800029, 2009 WL 1911692, at *1 (E.D. Cal. July 1, 2009)(followed)
  • Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 312 (1996)(followed)
  • Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254-55 (1936)(not reached)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…