City of West Sacramento v. R & L Business Management

I. Factual and Procedural Background

3 This court described much of the factual and procedural 4 background to this lawsuit in its prior orders. (See Docket Nos. 5 18, 33, 44, and 63.). The City now moves for partial summary 6 judgment on its CERCLA,1 RCRA,2 Gatto Act,3 public nuisance, and 7 declaratory relief claims against the business, R&L Business 8 Management, aka/fka Stockton Plating, Inc. (“R&L”), and the 9 Estate of Nick Smith, Deceased (“Smith”). (Pls.’ Mot. for Summ. 10 J. at 2 (Docket No. 95).) The City also seeks partial summary 11 judgment against John Clark (collectively with R&L and Smith, 12 “Defendants”) on its CERCLA, public nuisance, and declaratory 13 relief claims. (Id.) In turn, Smith moves to continue hearing 14 on plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment under Federal Rule of 15 Civil Procedure 56(d) to allow Smith to depose Dr. Ann Farr. 16 (Decl. of Michael Guasco (“Guasco Decl.”) (Docket No. 105-1).)

II. Defendant Smith’s Motion for Continuance

18 “A district court should continue a summary judgment 19 motion upon a good faith showing by affidavit that the 20 continuance is needed to obtain facts essential to preclude 21 summary judgment.”…