Case: Madrigal v. The County of Monterey

5:06-cv-01407 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Feb. 24, 2006

Closed Date: April 24, 2008

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case is about whether English-only, citizen-sponsored petitions and materials, which were approved by Monterey County, California for inclusion on local election ballots, were unlawful under the language requirements of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. The Initiative Cases A group of citizens in Monterey County (the “County”) circulated an initiative petition (the “Initiative”) which, if passed, would have presented for voter consideration an amendment of certain zoning and land devel…

The Initiative Cases

A group of citizens in Monterey County (the “County”) circulated an initiative petition (the “Initiative”) which, if passed, would have presented for voter consideration an amendment of certain zoning and land development provisions of the Monterey County General Plan and the requirement of a public election for future zoning changes. In January of 2006, the proponents of the Initiative filed a notice with the County Elections Department of their intent to circulate the petition and a copy of the proposed final Initiative. The County approved the form and content of the petition for circulation among voters and provided the approved petition and materials to the proponents for publication in a newspaper and for circulation to registered voters. All of these materials were only printed in English.

1. Madrigal Plaintiffs Case (5:06-cv-01407)

On February 24, 2006, a group of Spanish-speaking citizens opposing the Initiative (the “Madrigal Plaintiffs”) filed a lawsuit against the County in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Represented by private counsel, the Madrigal Plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment clarifying that the English-only materials violated Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act because they were not also made available in Spanish and requested an injunction against further processing of the Initiative. The case was assigned to Judge James Ware.

Later that month, on February 28, after receiving a legal report from Monterey County Counsel addressing procedural and substantive concerns with respect to the content and form of the Initiative under both federal and California law, including the lack of Spanish materials, the Board of Supervisors voted not to place the Initiative on the ballot.

2. Melendez Plaintiffs Case (5:06-cv-01730)

On March 1, 2006, represented by private counsel, a separate group of plaintiffs - the proponents of the Initiative (the “Melendez Plaintiffs”) - filed a mandamus action in the Superior Court of the County of Monterey to compel the County to place the Initiative on the ballot. Since the requisite number of qualified signatures had been obtained, the Melendez Plaintiffs alleged that the County had a ministerial duty to place the Initiative on the ballot.

On March 7, 2006, the County removed the Melendez action to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that it refused to place the Initiative on the ballot because the Initiative was inconsistent with Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. The case was also assigned to Judge James Ware.

On March 14, 2006, the Melendez Plaintiffs moved for a temporary restraining order, and three days later the Madrigal Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction. On March 20, 2006, the Court consolidated the two suits into a single action captioned In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter, which continued on the Madrigal docket (5:06-cv-01407).

Later that month, on March 23, the Court ruled in favor of the Madrigal Plaintiffs and permanently enjoined the County from processing, certifying or adopting the Initiative and from placing it on a ballot for a future County election unless or until first properly circulating it in compliance with the Voting Rights Act. 427 F.Supp.2d 958. The Melendez Plaintiffs immediately appealed this to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The Referendum Cases

Separately, on November 7, 2005, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors (“Board”) passed a resolution to amend certain provisions of the Monterey County General Plan, the Greater Salinas Area Land Use Plan, and the Rancho San Juan Area of Development Concentration Development Guidelines and Principles (“Resolution”). Opponents of the Resolution (the "Rancho Plaintiffs") began circulating a referendum against the Board's Resolution (the "Referendum"). These materials were also only printed in English. The Board initially ordered that the Referendum be placed on the June 2006 ballot.

1. Rangel Plaintiffs Case (5:06-cv-02202)

In response, on March 27, 2006, opponents of the Referendum's materials (the "Rangel Plaintiffs") filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Represented by private counsel, they sought a declaration that that the Referendum was invalid under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act because its materials were printed and circulated only in English. As a result, on March 28, 2006, the Board withdrew the Referendum from the June 2006 ballot, citing the Ninth Circuit’s initial decision in Padilla v. Lever, 429 F.3d 910 (9th Cir. 2005), which held that the dual-language provision of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act required the Referendum’s materials to be in both English and Spanish.

The case was assigned to Judge James Ware. Later that year, on May 22, the parties agreed to stay the case while the Ninth Circuit reheard Padilla en banc.

2. Rancho Plaintiffs Case (5:06-cv-02369)

On April 3, 2006, the Rancho Plaintiffs filed suit in the Superior Court of the County of Monterey. Represented by private counsel, they sought a declaratory judgment that the Referendum was proper and injunctive relief to compel the Board to put the Referendum to voters in the next election. Three days later, the case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The case was initially assigned to Judge Jeremy Fogel, but was reassigned on May 10, 2006 to Judge James Ware.

Later that year, on July 3, the Rancho Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction. On August 15, 2006 the Court denied the Rancho Plaintiffs' motion and stayed both Rangel and Rancho while the Ninth Circuit reheard Padilla en banc. 2006 WL 2355120.

Later that year, on October 25, Rancho was consolidated with Rangel as In re Monterey Referendum on the Rangel docket (5:06-cv-02202).

Consolidated Case

In September 2006, the Ninth Circuit issued its en banc ruling in Padilla, withdrawing its prior ruling. 463 F.3d 1046.

Two months later, on November 6, the Rancho Plaintiffs and the County both moved for summary judgment in In re Monterey Referendum. The next day, the Rangel Plaintiffs also moved for summary judgment.

Later that month, on November 20, the Ninth Circuit vacated the district court's injunction for the Madrigal Plaintiffs and remanded the case so the district court could decide how the Padilla decision bore on this case.

On December 18, 2006, the Rangel Plaintiffs moved, pursuant to Section 204 of the Voting Rights Act, which authorizes the Attorney General of the United States to institute an action to enforce Section 203, for the convening of a three-judge panel to hear the motions regarding the Referendum. Later that month, on December 27, 2006, the Court consolidated In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter and In re Monterey Referendum for pretrial purposes.

Based on the en banc ruling in Padilla, on February 6, 2007, the Madrigal Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their action against the County, without prejudice. This left both of the Referendum cases and the Melendez Plaintiffs’ Initiative case remaining for the Court’s consideration.

On February 7, 2007, the Rancho Plaintiffs moved for summary judgment and requested to enjoin the County to either repeal the Resolution of submit the Referendum to the voters. The Melendez Plaintiffs also moved for summary judgment and requested to remand the case to state court or, in the alternative, compel the County to enact the Initiative in its entirety, or, in the alternative, submit the Initiative to the voters. The County requested for the Cout to dismiss the Melendez case since the controversy had been mooted by a promise to place the Initiative on the upcoming ballot. The following day, on February 8, the Rangel Plaintiffs also moved for summary judgment.

In a March 29, 2007 decision, based largely on the en banc decision in Padilla, the Court denied the Rangel Plaintiffs’ request for the convening of a three-judge court. In so doing, the Court found that the Rangel Plaintiffs’ suit, a private action and not one brought on behalf of the Attorney General of the United States, did not arise under Section 204 of the Voting Rights Act. 2007 WL 9811086.

As for the parties’ cross-summary judgment motions, the Court found that (1) the Referendum at issue was privately initiated, drafted, and circulated by its proponents and, thus, was not subject to the dual-language requirement of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act; and (2) given the need for judicial economy and the procedural posture of the case, the Court would not remand the Melendez Plaintiffs’ case back to state court. The Court also acknowledged that with the Madrigal Plaintiffs’ dismissal of their claim and the County’s decision to place the Initiative on the upcoming ballot, it would Grant the Melendez Plaintiffs’ injunction to require the County to submit the Initiative to the voters in the upcoming election.

As a result of the Court's findings, it ordered that the County submit both the Initiative and the Referendum in their entirety and without alteration to the voters of the County at the June 5, 2007 County election.

The following month, on April 6, the Rangel Plaintiffs moved to alter the judgment and for an injunction pending appeal. A few days later, the County also moved to alter the judgment. Later that month, on April 26, the Court denied the motion for an injunction pending appeal. 2007 WL 9811085. Soon after, on April 30, the Rangel Plaintiffs appealed the summary judgment order to the Ninth Circuit. The next month, on May 17, the Court denied the County's motion to alter the judgment. 2007 WL 1455869.

On July 30, 2007, the Melendez Plaintiffs moved for attorneys' fees; the Rancho Plaintiffs also moved for attorneys' fees. The Court granted the motions on November 9 of that year, 2007 WL 3342796, but the parties settled out of court for attorneys' fees.

The following year, on April 10, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal as moot. The case is now closed.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Derek Centola (12/29/2023)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5748792/parties/in-re-county-of-monterey-initiative-matter/

Judge(s)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Austin, Mark J. (California)

Avila, Joaquin Guadalupe (California)

Flanders, Jason Robert (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Blankenship, Leroy W. (California)

Flynn, John Joseph (California)

Judge(s)

Ware, James (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Austin, Mark J. (California)

Avila, Joaquin Guadalupe (California)

Flanders, Jason Robert (California)

Ramirez, John Andrew (California)

Strumwasser, Michael Jay (California)

Wagner, Keith G. (California)

Washington, Zahirah (California)

Yeates, John William (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Blankenship, Leroy W. (California)

Flynn, John Joseph (California)

Iglesia, Efren N. (California)

McKee, Charles J. (California)

Roberts, Stephen Norvell (California)

Tutt, Nicole A. (California)

Woocher, Fredric Dean (California)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
1 5:06-cv-01407	Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Madrigal et al v. The County of Monterey et al	Feb. 24, 2006	Feb. 24, 2006 Complaint
3 5:06-cv-01407	Related Case Order Madrigal et al v. The County of Monterey et al	March 13, 2006	March 13, 2006 Order/Opinion
22 5:06-cv-01407	Order Consolidating Cases In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 Order/Opinion 427 F.Supp.2d 958
24 5:06-cv-01407	Answer To Complaint for Declaratory Relief And Injunctive Relief Of Madrigal Plaintiffs In Re County Of Monterey Initiative Matter	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 Pleading / Motion / Brief
17 5:06-cv-01407	Defendants’ Reply to Madrigal Case Plaintiffs’ Motion For Injunction Madrigal et al v. The County of Monterey et al	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 Pleading / Motion / Brief
18 5:06-cv-01407	Madrigal Plaintiffs' Reply Brief Madrigal et al v. The County of Monterey et al	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 Pleading / Motion / Brief 2006 WL 1027886
27 5:06-cv-01407	Declaratory Judgment and Permanent Injunction In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter	March 23, 2006	March 23, 2006 Order/Opinion
26 5:06-cv-01407	Order Re: Motions For Injunctive Relief and Declaratory Judgments In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter	March 23, 2006	March 23, 2006 Order/Opinion 427 F.Supp.2d 958
1 06-cv-02202	Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Rangel v. The County of Monterey	March 27, 2006	March 27, 2006 Complaint
31 5:06-cv-01407	Notice of Appeal and Representation Statement In re County of Monterey Initiative Matter; Melendez, et al. v. Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey	March 27, 2006	March 27, 2006 Pleading / Motion / Brief

show / hide documents

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5748792/in-re-county-of-monterey-initiative-matter/

Last updated March 17, 2024, 3:20 a.m.

Change selected docket

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, CLASS ACTION; (Summons Served); against The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo ( Filing fee $ 250, receipt number 5514037.). Filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2006) Additional attachment(s) added on 2/26/2006 (bw, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/26/2006)	Feb. 24, 2006	Feb. 24, 2006 Clearinghouse
2	ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 6/21/2006. Case Management Conference set for 6/28/2006 02:30 PM. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2006) (Entered: 02/26/2006)	Feb. 24, 2006	Feb. 24, 2006 PACER
	Summons Issued as to The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2006)	Feb. 24, 2006	Feb. 24, 2006 PACER
	CASE DESIGNATED for Electronic Filing. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2006)	Feb. 24, 2006	Feb. 24, 2006 PACER
3	ORDER RELATING CASE. Case C06-01730 is related to this case. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/13/06. (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/13/2006) (Entered: 03/13/2006)	March 13, 2006	March 13, 2006 Clearinghouse
4	CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/14/2006) (Entered: 03/14/2006)	March 14, 2006	March 14, 2006 PACER
5	ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge James Ware for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Richard Seeborg remains as the referral judge to the case. Signed by Executive Committee on March 14, 2006(bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/14/2006) (Entered: 03/14/2006)	March 14, 2006	March 14, 2006 PACER
6	MOTION for Preliminary Injunction or Alternatively Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. Motion Hearing set for 3/21/2006 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006) 1 Affidavit Signature Attestation View on PACER	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
7	Declaration of John A. Ramirez In Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and In Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit B# 2 Exhibit Exhibit C# 3 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
8	Declaration of Maria Buell in Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and in Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit B# 2 Exhibit Exhibit C# 3 Exhibit Exhibit F# 4 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
9	EXHIBITS re 8 Declaration in Support, Exhibit E to Maria Buell Declaration filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Related document(s) 8 ) (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
10	Declaration of Sabas Rangel In Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and in Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement English Translation of Declaration# 2 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
11	Declaration of Rosario Madrigal In Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and in Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement English Translation of Declaration# 2 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
12	Proposed Order re 6 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction or Alternatively Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
13	Ex Parte Application for Order Shortening Time on Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. Motion Hearing set for 3/21/2006 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
14	Declaration of Mark J. Austin in Support of Ex Parte Application for Order Shortening Time on Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
15	Proposed Order re 13 Ex Parte Application for Order Shortening Time on Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
16	AFFIDAVIT of Service of Preliminary Injunction Documents by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Signature Attestation)(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/17/2006) (Entered: 03/17/2006)	March 17, 2006	March 17, 2006 PACER
17	Reply Memorandum TO MADRIGAL CASE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR INJUNCTION filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 Clearinghouse
18	Reply Memorandum in Support of Madrigal Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and Replying to Melendez Plaintiffs' March 17th Memorandum filed byMaria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (Austin, Mark) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 Clearinghouse
19	Proposed Order Denying Madrigal Case Plaintiffs' Request for Injunction by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 PACER
20	Declaration of JOHN A. RAMIREZ in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 PACER
21	Declaration of Maria Buell in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 PACER
22	ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES. ALL FUTURE PAPERS SHALL BE FILED IN C06-1407. THE CLERK SHALL CLOSE C06-1730 JW. IN ALL FUTURE FILINGS, THE CAPTION SHALL READ: IN RE COUNTY OF MONTEREY INITIATIVE MATTER. Signed by Judge James Ware on March 20, 2006. (jwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2006) Modified on 3/22/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/20/2006)	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 Clearinghouse
23	ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand TO VERIFIED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE AND COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF OF MELENDEZ PLAINTIFFS byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 PACER
24	ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF OF MADRIGAL PLAINTIFFS byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/20/2006) (Entered: 03/20/2006)	March 20, 2006	March 20, 2006 Clearinghouse
25	Minute Entry: Preliminary Injunction Hearing held on 3/21/2006 before James Ware (Date Filed: 3/21/2006). (Court Reporter Peter Torreano.) (mp, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 3/21/2006) (Entered: 03/21/2006)	March 21, 2006	March 21, 2006 PACER
26	ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS. by Judge James Ware. (jwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)	March 23, 2006	March 23, 2006 Clearinghouse
27	DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION signed by Judge James Ware. (jwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)	March 23, 2006	March 23, 2006 Clearinghouse
28	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel (The Courty of Monterey) (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)	March 23, 2006	March 23, 2006 PACER
29	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel (The Board of Supervisors of the Courty of Monterey) (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)	March 23, 2006	March 23, 2006 PACER
30	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Maria Buell, Rosario Madrigal, Sabas Rangel (Tony Anchundo) (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2006) (Entered: 03/23/2006)	March 23, 2006	March 23, 2006 PACER
31	NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 26 Order on Ex Parte Application, 27 Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction by William. Melendez. Filing fee $ 255, receipt number 5514243. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/27/2006) Additional attachment(s) added on 3/28/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/27/2006)	March 27, 2006	March 27, 2006 Clearinghouse
32	TRANSCRIPT DESIGNATION and Ordering Form by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County for proceedings held on 03/14/2006 in case number C06-1730 JW Court Reporter Irene Rodriguez; 03/21/2006 in case number C06-1407 JW, Court Reporter Peter Torreano before Judge James Ware.. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 3/29/2006) Modified text on 3/29/2006, to reflect the hearing for 3/14/06.(cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/29/2006)	March 29, 2006	March 29, 2006 PACER
	Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheets case number C06-1407 JW and C06-1730 JW to US Court of Appeals re 31 Notice of Appeal, (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/29/2006) Modified on 3/29/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF).	March 29, 2006	March 29, 2006 PACER
33	REPORTERS TRANSCRIPT filed for hearing date of March 21, 2006 before Judge James Ware, re 31 Notice of Appeal, Court Reporter: Peter Torreano. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2006) (Entered: 05/08/2006)	May 5, 2006	May 5, 2006 PACER
	Certificate of Record Mailed to USCA re appeal 31 Notice of Appeal, : and Reporters Transcript for hearing of 3/16/06 filed in docket number C06-1730 JW (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2006)	May 5, 2006	May 5, 2006 PACER
34	USCA JUDGMENT as to 31 Notice of Appeal IS VACATED AND REMANDED. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2006) (Entered: 11/22/2006)	Nov. 22, 2006	Nov. 22, 2006 Clearinghouse
35	ORDER of USCA as to 31 Notice of Appeal. The District Court's 3/23/06 order and declaratory judgment are VACATED. This appeal is REMANDED TO THE District Court. The clerk shall ISSUE THE MANDATE forthwith. (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2006) (Entered: 11/22/2006)	Nov. 22, 2006	Nov. 22, 2006 Clearinghouse
36	CLERKS Letter Spreading Mandate to Counsel (cv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2006) (Entered: 11/22/2006)	Nov. 22, 2006	Nov. 22, 2006 PACER
37	MOTION for an order to Consolidate both sets if cases C06-2369 JW and C06-2202 JW, C06-1407 JW, C06-1730 JW Cases filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 11/28/2006) Modified text on 11/30/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 11/28/2006)	Nov. 28, 2006	Nov. 28, 2006 Clearinghouse
38	Declaration of Stephen N. Roberts in Support of 37 MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Related document(s) 37 ) (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 11/28/2006) (Entered: 11/28/2006)	Nov. 28, 2006	Nov. 28, 2006 PACER
39	Proposed Order re 37 MOTION to Consolidate Cases by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 11/28/2006) (Entered: 11/28/2006)	Nov. 28, 2006	Nov. 28, 2006 PACER
40	Memorandum in Opposition re 37 MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed byRancho San Juan Opposition Coalition. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 11/29/2006) (Entered: 11/29/2006)	Nov. 29, 2006	Nov. 29, 2006 Clearinghouse
41	ORDER VACATING HEARING ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; SETTING CASE MANANGENT CONFERENCE. Telephonic Initial Case Management Conference set for 12/13/2006 10:00 AM. Please see Order for specifics. Signed by Judge James Ware on 12/7/2006. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/7/2006) (Entered: 12/07/2006)	Dec. 7, 2006	Dec. 7, 2006 Clearinghouse
42	Minute Entry: Further Case Management Conference held on 12/13/2006 before James Ware (Date Filed: 12/13/2006). Please see Minute Order for specifics. (Court Reporter Not Reported.) (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 12/13/2006) (Entered: 12/13/2006)	Dec. 13, 2006	Dec. 13, 2006 PACER
43	ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES C06-1407 JW and C06-2202 JW. The consolidation is for the purposes of pretrial motions ONLY. The cases shall maintain their separate designated case names and; SETTING NEW HEARING DATE for all motions is specially set for 2/27/07 at 9:00am in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. Signed by Judge James Ware on 12/27/2006. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/27/2006) Modified on 12/28/2006 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 12/27/2006)	Dec. 27, 2006	Dec. 27, 2006 Clearinghouse
44	STIPULATION and Proposed Order Regarding Briefing Schedule on Summary Judgment Motions by William. Melendez, Maria Buell, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, The County of Monterey, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo, Sabas Rangel. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/5/2007) (Entered: 02/05/2007)	Feb. 5, 2007	Feb. 5, 2007 PACER
45	STIPULATION of Dismissal for Madrigal Action Only, Case No. 5:06-cv-1407 by Rosario Madrigal. (Attachments: # 1 Signature Page (Declarations/Stipulations))(Austin, Mark) (Filed on 2/5/2007) (Entered: 02/05/2007)	Feb. 5, 2007	Feb. 5, 2007 PACER
46	ORDER GRANTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS re 44 Stipulation, filed by The County of Monterey,Carolyn Anderson, William Melendez, Sabas Rangel, Maria Buell, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition. The Opening Brief is Due on February 7 2007. Opposition and Closing Briefs will be due on February 13 2007. The Opening Brief may be 35 pages rather than 25. Signed by Judge James Ware on 2/6/2007. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2007) (Entered: 02/06/2007)	Feb. 6, 2007	Feb. 6, 2007 Clearinghouse
47	ORDER GRANTING VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL re 45 Stipulation of Dismissal filed by Rosario Madrigal. Signed by Judge James Ware on 2/6/2007. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2007) (Entered: 02/06/2007)	Feb. 6, 2007	Feb. 6, 2007 Clearinghouse
48	Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Summary Judgment in Referendum Cases and in Support of Dismissal in the Melendez Initiative Case filed byThe County of Monterey, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)	Feb. 7, 2007	Feb. 7, 2007 Clearinghouse
49	Memoradum of Points and Authorities in Support of Summary Judgment in Referendum Cases and in Support of Dismissal in the Melendez Initiative Case filed by The County of Monterey, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. Motion Hearing set for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/7/2007) Modified text on 2/8/2007, document posted is an memoradum, not a motion (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/07/2007)	Feb. 7, 2007	Feb. 7, 2007 Clearinghouse
50	MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell, William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition. Motion Hearing set for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)	Feb. 7, 2007	Feb. 7, 2007 Clearinghouse
51	Declaration of Fredric D. Woocher in Support of 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Related document(s) 50 ) (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)	Feb. 7, 2007	Feb. 7, 2007 PACER
52	Declaration of Chris Fitz in Support of 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Related document(s) 50 ) (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)	Feb. 7, 2007	Feb. 7, 2007 PACER
53	MEMORANDUM in Support re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Related document(s) 50 ) (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)	Feb. 7, 2007	Feb. 7, 2007 Clearinghouse
54	Proposed Order re: Motion for Summary Judgment by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/7/2007) (Entered: 02/07/2007)	Feb. 7, 2007	Feb. 7, 2007 PACER
55	Memorandum in Opposition to Melendez Plaintiffs' Motion for Remand and Rancho San Juan Plaintiffs 50 Motion for Summary Judgment; and in Response to Rangel Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. Motion Hearing set for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified on 2/14/2007, (Counsel used incorrect event) - Correct event is opposition, not a motion. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)	Feb. 13, 2007	Feb. 13, 2007 Clearinghouse
56	exhibit E to 48 Request for Judicial Notice filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. Motion Hearing set for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified on 2/14/2007, Counsel used incorrect event) - Correct event is exhibit, not motion. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)	Feb. 13, 2007	Feb. 13, 2007 PACER
57	Proposed Order on Motions to be consolidated by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified on 2/14/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)	Feb. 13, 2007	Feb. 13, 2007 PACER
58	Memorandum in Opposition to County Defendants' 55 Motions for Summary Judgment and Rangel motions filed by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified on 2/14/2007 LINK TO MOTION.(cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)	Feb. 13, 2007	Feb. 13, 2007 Clearinghouse
59	Declaration of Fredric D. Woocher in Support of 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Supplemental) filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Related document(s) 50 ) (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/13/2007) (Entered: 02/13/2007)	Feb. 13, 2007	Feb. 13, 2007 PACER
60	Declaration of Ventura County Clerk-Recorder Registrar of Voters Philip J. Schmit filed by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 2/13/2007) Modified text on 2/14/2007, to conform with document posted by counsel. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/13/2007)	Feb. 13, 2007	Feb. 13, 2007 PACER
61	Minute Entry: Motion Hearing held on 2/27/2007 before James Ware. Matters taken under submission after oral arguments. (Date Filed: 2/27/2007) re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Carolyn Anderson, William. Melendez,, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Court Reporter Irene Rodriguez.) (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 2/27/2007) Modified on 2/27/2007 (ecg, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/27/2007)	Feb. 27, 2007	Feb. 27, 2007 PACER
62	Proposed Order re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Statement of Reasons by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 3/2/2007) (Entered: 03/02/2007)	March 2, 2007	March 2, 2007 PACER
63	Proposed Order re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Statement of Reasons by Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 3/2/2007) (Entered: 03/02/2007)	March 2, 2007	March 2, 2007 PACER
64	Proposed Order re 57 Proposed Order on Motions in Consolidated Cases; Explanation of Reasons for Order by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 3/7/2007) (Entered: 03/07/2007)	March 7, 2007	March 7, 2007 PACER
65	RESPONSE to County Defendants re 64 Proposed Order on motions in consolidated by Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 3/13/2007) Modified on 3/20/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/13/2007)	March 13, 2007	March 13, 2007 Clearinghouse
66	ORDER DENYING RANGEL PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR THE CONVENING OF A THREE JUDGE COURT; GRANTING THE MELENDEZ AND THE RANCHO SAN JUAN OPPOSITION COALITION PLAINTIFFS' MOITON FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND ORDERING THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY TO SUBMIT THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM TO VOTERS OF MONTEREY COUNTY AT THE JUNE 5, 2007 COUNTY ELECTION by Judge James Ware granting 50 Motion for Summary Judgment (jwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/29/2007) (Entered: 03/29/2007)	March 29, 2007	March 29, 2007 Clearinghouse
67	SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge James Ware on March 28, 2007. (jwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/29/2007) (Entered: 03/29/2007)	March 29, 2007	March 29, 2007 Clearinghouse
68	Memorandum in Opposition Response to Rangel Plaintiffs Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/11/2007) (Entered: 04/11/2007)	April 11, 2007	April 11, 2007 Clearinghouse
69	Declaration of Susan Orman filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/11/2007) (Entered: 04/11/2007)	April 11, 2007	April 11, 2007 PACER
70	Declaration of Stephen N. Roberts filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/11/2007) (Entered: 04/11/2007)	April 11, 2007	April 11, 2007 PACER
71	Memorandum in Opposition to Rangel Plaintiffs' Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal filed byRancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 4/11/2007) (Entered: 04/11/2007)	April 11, 2007	April 11, 2007 Clearinghouse
72	MOTION to Alter Judgment Notice of Motion and Motion to Clarify or Alter Judgment filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/12/2007) (Entered: 04/12/2007)	April 12, 2007	April 12, 2007 Clearinghouse
73	Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants Motion to Clarify or Alter Judgment re 72 filed byThe County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/12/2007) Modified on 4/13/2007 (cfe, Court Staff). (Entered: 04/12/2007)	April 12, 2007	April 12, 2007 Clearinghouse
74	Proposed Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Clarify or Alter Judgment re 72 by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 4/12/2007) Modified on 4/13/2007 (cfe, Court Staff). (Entered: 04/12/2007)	April 12, 2007	April 12, 2007 PACER
75	ORDER Denying Rangel Plaintiffs' Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal. Signed by Judge James Ware on 4/25/2007. (jwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2007) (Entered: 04/26/2007)	April 26, 2007	April 26, 2007 Clearinghouse
76	Memorandum in Opposition re 72 MOTION to Alter Judgment Notice of Motion and Motion to Clarify or Alter Judgment filed byWilliam. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 4/30/2007) (Entered: 04/30/2007)	April 30, 2007	April 30, 2007 Clearinghouse
77	Reply in support of Defendants' 72 Motion to Clarify 66 order or Alter Judgment filed by The County of Monterey. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 5/7/2007) Modified on 5/7/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 05/07/2007)	May 7, 2007	May 7, 2007 Clearinghouse
78	Declaration of Gary Greenfield in Support of Defendants' 81 Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Awards of Attorneys' Fees and Costs filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 10/1/2007) Modified text on 10/12/2007,(counsel failed to link to which document relates to) motion for attorneys fees has not been posted in this case. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/01/2007)	Oct. 1, 2007	Oct. 1, 2007 PACER
79	OBJECTIONS to Declarations of Michael Strumwasser and Michael Rubin in Case Numbers C 06-01730 JW and C06-02369JW by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 10/1/2007) (Entered: 10/01/2007)	Oct. 1, 2007	Oct. 1, 2007 PACER
80	Declaration of Sophie N. Froelich In Support of Defendants' 81 Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Awards of Attorneys' Fees and Costs filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 10/1/2007) Modified on 10/12/2007,(counsel failed to link to which document relates to) *** motion for attorneys fees has not been posted in this case. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/01/2007)	Oct. 1, 2007	Oct. 1, 2007 PACER
81	MEMORANDUM in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motions for Awards of Attorneys' Fees and Costs filed by The County of Monterey, The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, Tony Anchundo. (Roberts, Stephen) (Filed on 10/1/2007) Modified on 10/12/2007,(counsel failed to link *** motion for attorneys fees has not been posted in this case. (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/01/2007)	Oct. 1, 2007	Oct. 1, 2007 Clearinghouse
82	Reply Declaration of Fredric D. Woocher filed by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 10/8/2007) Modified on 10/9/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/08/2007)	Oct. 8, 2007	Oct. 8, 2007 PACER
83	OBJECTIONS to re 78 Declaration in Support, by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 10/8/2007) (Entered: 10/08/2007)	Oct. 8, 2007	Oct. 8, 2007 PACER
84	Reply Memorandum in Support of *** Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs said motion has NOT been E-Filed in this case filed by William. Melendez, Ken Gray, Jyl Lutes, Carolyn Anderson, Landwatch Monterey County, Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition, Citizens for Responsible Growth, Julie Engell. (Woocher, Fredric) (Filed on 10/8/2007) Modified text on 10/9/2007 (cv, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 10/08/2007)	Oct. 8, 2007	Oct. 8, 2007 Clearinghouse
	FILE LOCATED AT FEDERAL RECORDS CENTER (FRC) San Bruno, CA. Accession #; 021-07-0061; Location #; 735513; Box #; 163. (pmc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2007)	Oct. 26, 2007	Oct. 26, 2007 PACER
85	ORDER by Judge James Ware finding as moot 72 Motion to Alter Judgment (jwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/18/2008) (Entered: 03/18/2008)	March 18, 2008	March 18, 2008 RECAP