United States District Court Northern District of California

Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document730 Filed08/17/10 Page1 of 4
1 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

Theodore B. Olson, SBN 38137
2 tolson@gibsondunn.com
Matthew D. McGill, pro hac vice
3 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036
Telephone: (202) 955-8668, Facsimile: (202) 467-0539
4 Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., SBN 132009
tboutrous@gibsondunn.com
5 Christopher D. Dusseault, SBN 177557
Ethan D. Dettmer, SBN 196046
6 333 S. Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-7804, Facsimile: (213) 229-7520
7 BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
David Boies, pro hac vice
8 dboies@bsfllp.com
333 Main Street, Armonk, New York 10504
9 Telephone: (914) 749-8200, Facsimile: (914) 749-8300
Jeremy M. Goldman, SBN 218888
10 jgoldman@bsfllp.com
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900, Oakland, California 94612
11 Telephone: (510) 874-1000, Facsimile: (510) 874-1460
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
12 KRISTIN M. PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER,
PAUL T. KATAMI, and JEFFREY J. ZARRILLO
13 Dennis J. Herrera, SBN 139669
Therese M. Stewart, SBN 104930
14 Danny Chou, SBN 180240
15 One Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, California 94102-4682
16 Telephone: (415) 554-4708, Facsimile (415) 554-4699
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Intervenor
17 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
19
20 KRISTIN M. PERRY, et al., CASE NO. 09-CV-2292 VRW

Plaintiffs,
21 DECLARATION OF ENRIQUE A.
and MONAGAS IN SUPPORT OF
22 PLAINTIFFS’ AND PLAINTIFF-
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, INTERVENOR’S MOTION TO
23 Plaintiff-Intervenor, ENLARGE TIME
v.
24
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,
25
Defendants,
26 and
27 PROPOSITION 8 OFFICIAL PROPONENTS
DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, et al.,
28 Defendant-Intervenors.
Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLP
09-CV-2292 VRW DECLARATION OF ENRIQUE A. MONAGAS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’
AND PLAINTIFF-INTERVENOR’S MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME
1 I, Enrique A. Monagas, declare as follows:
2 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California and in the United States
3 District Court for the Northern District of California. I am an associate at the law firm of Gibson,
4 Dunn & Crutcher LLP, counsel of record for Plaintiffs Kristin M. Perry, Sandra B. Stier, Paul T.
5 Katami, and Jeffrey J. Zarrillo (“Plaintiffs”). I make this declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ and
6 Plaintiff-Intervenor’s motion to enlarge time. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein,
7 and if called as a witness, I could and would competently testify hereto.
8 2. This Court entered its findings of fact and conclusions of law on August 4, Doc #708, and
9 entered a permanent injunction on August 12, Doc #728. Since that time, the parties have been
10 expeditiously briefing Defendant-Intervenors’ motion to stay this Court’s decision pending appeal.
11 3. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(2)(B)(i) provides prevailing parties with 14 days
12 after the entry of judgment in which to file a motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses. In a
13 case such as this one, however, where the parties expended significant resources on pre-trial motions,
14 discovery, a three-week trial, and post-trial briefing and argument, the preparation of a motion for
15 attorney’s fees and related expenses—and any opposition thereto—is likely to be unusually time-
16 consuming.
17 4. On August 16, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ordered that
18 Proponents’ appeal from this Court’s decision be expedited pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate
19 Procedure 2 and entered the following briefing schedule: the opening brief is due September 17,
20 2010; the answering brief is due October 18, 2010; and the reply brief is due November 1, 2010.
21 Under the current schedule, any motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses must be prepared and
22 submitted at the same time that the expedited appeal on the merits is proceeding.
23 5. Enlarging the time to file a motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses would enable
24 the parties to commit their full litigation resources to the appeal at this time and would allow any
25 motion for fees and related expenses to proceed only at such time as the prevailing party has been
26 finally determined. In short, enlarging the time to file a motion for attorney’s fees and related
27 expenses will not prejudice any party and will indeed avoid unnecessary burden to the parties and the
28 Court while the parties address the appeal on the merits and promote judicial economy.
Gibson, Dunn &

2
Crutcher LLP
1 6. Plaintiffs’ counsel contacted all parties involved in an attempt to obtain a stipulation to
2 enlarge time. Defendants Arnold Schwarzenegger, Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Mark B. Horton, Linette
3 Scott, Patrick O’Connell, and Dean C. Logan have all agreed to enlarging the time. Counsel for Hak-
4 Shing William Tam did not respond to Plaintiffs’ counsel’s inquiry. Only Defendant-Intervenors
5 Proposition 8 Official Proponents Dennis Hollingsworth, Gail J. Knight, Martin F. Gutierrez, and
6 Mark A. Jansson; and ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8, A Project of California Renewal
7 (“Defendant-Intervenors”) have not agreed to the extension.
8 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of an e-mail from Andrew W.
9 Stroud, counsel for Defendants Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mark B. Horton, and Linette
10 Scott, agreeing to a proposed stipulation extending the time to file a motion for attorney’s fees and
11 related expenses.
12 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of an e-mail from Tamar Pachter,
13 counsel for Defendant Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, Jr., agreeing to a proposed stipulation
14 extending the time to file a motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses.
15 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of an e-mail from Claude Kolm,
16 counsel for Defendant Patrick O’Connell, agreeing to a proposed stipulation extending the time to file
17 a motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses.
18 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of an e-mail from Judy Whitehurst,
19 counsel for Defendant Dean C. Logan, agreeing to a proposed stipulation extending the time to file a
20 motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses.
21 11. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of an e-mail from David
22 Thompson, counsel for Defendant-Intervenors, advising that “The proponents do not agree to the
23 stipulation outlined below, nor do we agree to an extension of time for the filing of a motion for
24 attorneys’ fees.”
25 12. I am aware of four previous time modifications in this case, two by Court order, see
26 Doc #170, Doc #710, and two by stipulation, see Doc #266, Doc #615.
27 13. The requested time modification would not affect the schedule of this case.
28 ///
Gibson, Dunn &

3
Crutcher LLP
1 I declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States, that these facts are true
2 and correct and that this Declaration is executed this 17th day of August 2010 at San Francisco,
3 California.
4 /s/ Enrique A. Monagas

Enrique A. Monagas
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &

4
Crutcher LLP
Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document730-1 Filed08/17/10 Page1 of 3
Exhibit A
Monagas, Enrique A.
From: Andy Stroud [stroud@mgslaw.com]
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 3:21 PM
To: Monagas, Enrique A.
Cc: Landon Bailey; Bernstein, Erin; Bettan, Richard; Boutrous Jr., Theodore J.; Burns, Gordon;
Campbell, J; Chhabria,Vince; Chou, Danny; Cooper, Chuck; Daly, Catheryn; Dettmer, Ethan
D.; Dusseault, Christopher D.; Flynn, Ronald; Goldman, Jeremy; Kelcie Gosling; Janky, Mary;
Justice Lazarus, Rebecca; Kapur, Theane Evangelis; Angela Knight; Kolm, Claude; Lee,
Mollie; Malzahn, Scott; Martinez, Judith; Martinez, Manuel; McGill, Matthew D.; Ken
Mennemeier; Monagas, Enrique A.; Moss,Nicole; Nielson, Howard; Olson, Theodore B.;
Pachter, Tamar; Panuccio, Jessie; Patterson, Pete; Piepmeier, Sarah E.; Raum, Brian;
Richardson,Beko; Schiller, Josh; Stewart, Therese; Tayrani, Amir C.; Thompson, David; Uno,
Theodore; Van Aken, Christine; Washington, Brian; Whitehurst, Judy; Gold, Russell; Terry L.
Thompson; Daniel Powell
Subject: Re: Perry v. Schwarzenegger: Stipulation
The Administration Defendants will so stipulate.
Andy Stroud
Sent from my iPhone PLs excuse typos
On Aug 16, 2010, at 5:59 PM, "Monagas, Enrique A." <EMonagas@gibsondunn.com> wrote:
Counsel,
As the prevailing party, Plaintiffs are entitled to seek attorney's fees and related expenses.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(2)(B)(i) provides that unless a court order provides
otherwise, a motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses must be "filed no later than 14 days
after the entry of judgment." In light of Defendant-Intervenors' notice of appeal and related
motion practice, Plaintiffs would like to enter into a stipulation with all parties extending the
time by which a motion for attorney’s fees must be filed to 30 days after all appeals become
final.
Additionally, if the Court is reluctant to enter our stipulation, in the alternative we would like to
stipulate to an extended briefing schedule: movant's motion would be due 45 days after the court
rules on the fees/costs briefing issue; those seeking to oppose the motion for attorney’s fees and
costs would have 45 days after the motion is filed to do so; and movant would then have 30 days
to reply to the opposition.
Given the 14-day filing deadline imposed by FRCP 54, we would like to get a stipulation on file
tomorrow. Please confirm either today or tomorrow morning whether or not you would agree to
a stipulation. If the parties agree, Plaintiffs will circulate a proposed stipulation and order.
1
Please be advised that in the event we cannot reach an agreement among the parties, Plaintiffs
may seek to extend time by motion practice. Thank you.
Enrique A. Monagas
GIBSON DUNN
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
555 Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-2933
Tel +1 415.393.8353 • Fax +1 415.374.8403
EMonagas@gibsondunn.com • www.gibsondunn.com
=============================================================================
=
This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If it has
been sent to you in error, please reply to advise the sender of the error and
then immediately delete this message.
=============================================================================
=
2
Exhibit B
Monagas, Enrique A.
From: Tamar Pachter [Tamar.Pachter@doj.ca.gov]
To: Brian Washington; Claude Kolm; Judith Martinez; Manuel Martinez; Beko Richardson;
Jeremy Goldman; Josh Schiller; Richard Bettan; Theodore Uno; Chuck Cooper; David
Thompson; Howard Nielson; Jessie Panuccio; Nicole Moss; Pete Patterson; Judy Whitehurst;
Daniel Powell; Gordon Burns; Terry L. Thompson; Tayrani, Amir C.; Dusseault, Christopher
D.; Dettmer, Ethan D.; Monagas, Enrique A.; Janky, Mary; McGill, Matthew D.; Gold, Russell;
Justice Lazarus, Rebecca; Malzahn, Scott; Piepmeier, Sarah E.; Boutrous Jr., Theodore J.;
Kapur, Theane Evangelis; Olson, Theodore B.; A Knight; Kelcie M. Gosling; Kenneth C.
Mennemeier; Landon Bailey; Andy Stroud; Catheryn Daly; Christine Van Aken; Danny Chou;
Erin Bernstein; Mollie Lee; Ronald Flynn; Therese Stewart; Vince Chhabria; Brian Raum; J
Campbell
Subject: Re: Perry v. Schwarzenegger: Stipulation
Enrique:
The AG will so stipulate.
Best,
Tamar
Tamar Pachter
Deputy Attorney General
Government Law Section
California Department of Justice
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
Direct Dial: 415.703.5970
>>> "Monagas, Enrique A." <EMonagas@gibsondunn.com> 8/16/2010 2:59 PM >>>

Counsel,

As the prevailing party, Plaintiffs are entitled to seek attorney's fees and related expenses. Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 54(d)(2)(B)(i) provides that unless a court order provides otherwise, a motion for attorney’s fees and related
expenses must be "filed no later than 14 days after the entry of judgment." In light of Defendant‐Intervenors' notice of
appeal and related motion practice, Plaintiffs would like to enter into a stipulation with all parties extending the time
by which a motion for attorney’s fees must be filed to 30 days after all appeals become final.

Additionally, if the Court is reluctant to enter our stipulation, in the alternative we would like to stipulate to an
extended briefing schedule: movant's motion would be due 45 days after the court rules on the fees/costs briefing
issue; those seeking to oppose the motion for attorney’s fees and costs would have 45 days after the motion is filed to
do so; and movant would then have 30 days to reply to the opposition.

Given the 14‐day filing deadline imposed by FRCP 54, we would like to get a stipulation on file tomorrow. Please
confirm either today or tomorrow morning whether or not you would agree to a stipulation. If the parties agree,
Plaintiffs will circulate a proposed stipulation and order. Please be advised that in the event we cannot reach an
agreement among the parties, Plaintiffs may seek to extend time by motion practice. Thank you.
Enrique A. Monagas
GIBSON DUNN
1

Tel +1 415.393.8353 • Fax +1 415.374.8403

==============================================================================
==============================================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication with its contents may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information. It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception, review, use or disclosure is
prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the communication.
2
Exhibit C
Monagas, Enrique A.
From: Kolm, Claude, County Counsel [claude.kolm@acgov.org]
To: Monagas, Enrique A.; Bailey, Landon; Bernstein, Erin; Bettan, Richard; Boutrous Jr.,
Theodore J.; Burns, Gordon; Campbell, J; Chhabria, Vince; Chou, Danny; Cooper, Chuck;
Daly, Catheryn; Dettmer, Ethan D.; Dusseault, Christopher D.; Flynn, Ronald; Goldman,
Jeremy; Gosling, Kelcie M.; Janky, Mary; Justice Lazarus, Rebecca; Kapur, Theane
Evangelis; Knight, A; Lee, Mollie; Malzahn, Scott; Martinez, Judith, County Counsel; Martinez,
Manuel F., County Counsel; McGill, Matthew D.; Mennemeier, Kenneth C.; Moss, Nicole;
Nielson, Howard; Olson, Theodore B.; Pachter, Tamar; Panuccio, Jessie; Patterson, Pete;
Piepmeier, Sarah E.; Raum, Brian; Richardson, Beko; Schiller, Josh; Stewart, Therese;
Stroud, Andy; Tayrani, Amir C.; Thompson, David; Uno, Theodore; Van Aken, Christine;
Washington, Brian, County Counsel; Whitehurst, Judy; Gold, Russell; Terry L. Thompson;
Daniel Powell
Subject: RE: Perry v. Schwarzenegger: Stipulation
The Alameda Clerk‐Recorder is willing to stipulate.

CLAUDE KOLM I Deputy County Counsel

Office of the County Counsel
1221 Oak Street, Suite 450 I Oakland, California 94612
510-272-6700 I Direct Line 510-272-6710 I Facsimile No. 510-272-5020
claude.kolm@acgov.org I www.acgov.org
NOTICE: If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or other otherwise using or disclosing its contents. This e-
mail and any attachments may contain information that is privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law and only for use by the intended
recipient(s). If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail or by telephone at (510) 272-6700, permanently delete this
message from your system and destroy all copies.

From: Monagas, Enrique A. [mailto:EMonagas@gibsondunn.com]
To: Bailey, Landon; Bernstein, Erin; Bettan, Richard; Boutrous Jr., Theodore J.; Burns, Gordon; Campbell, J; Chhabria,
Vince; Chou, Danny; Cooper, Chuck; Daly, Catheryn; Dettmer, Ethan D.; Dusseault, Christopher D.; Flynn, Ronald;
Goldman, Jeremy; Gosling, Kelcie M.; Janky, Mary; Justice Lazarus, Rebecca; Kapur, Theane Evangelis; Knight, A; Kolm,
Claude, County Counsel; Lee, Mollie; Malzahn, Scott; Martinez, Judith, County Counsel; Martinez, Manuel F., County
Counsel; McGill, Matthew D.; Mennemeier, Kenneth C.; Monagas, Enrique A.; Moss, Nicole; Nielson, Howard; Olson,
Theodore B.; Pachter, Tamar; Panuccio, Jessie; Patterson, Pete; Piepmeier, Sarah E.; Raum, Brian; Richardson, Beko;
Schiller, Josh; Stewart, Therese; Stroud, Andy; Tayrani, Amir C.; Thompson, David; Uno, Theodore; Van Aken, Christine;
Washington, Brian, County Counsel; Whitehurst, Judy; Gold, Russell; Terry L. Thompson; Daniel Powell
Subject: Perry v. Schwarzenegger: Stipulation

Counsel,

appeal and related motion practice, Plaintiffs would like to enter into a stipulation with all parties extending the time by
which a motion for attorney’s fees must be filed to 30 days after all appeals become final.

Additionally, if the Court is reluctant to enter our stipulation, in the alternative we would like to stipulate to an extended
briefing schedule: movant's motion would be due 45 days after the court rules on the fees/costs briefing issue; those
seeking to oppose the motion for attorney’s fees and costs would have 45 days after the motion is filed to do so; and
movant would then have 30 days to reply to the opposition.

1
Enrique A. Monagas
GIBSON DUNN
Tel +1 415.393.8353 • Fax +1 415.374.8403

==============================================================================
==============================================================================
2
Exhibit D
Monagas, Enrique A.
From: Whitehurst, Judy [Jwhitehurst@counsel.lacounty.gov]
Theodore J.; Burns, Gordon; Campbell, J; Chhabria, Vince; Chou, Danny; Cooper, Chuck;
Evangelis; Knight, A; Kolm, Claude; Lee, Mollie; Malzahn, Scott; Martinez, Judith; Martinez,
Manuel; McGill, Matthew D.; Mennemeier, Kenneth C.; Moss, Nicole; Nielson, Howard;
Olson, Theodore B.; Pachter, Tamar; Panuccio, Jessie; Patterson, Pete; Piepmeier, Sarah E.;
Raum, Brian; Richardson, Beko; Schiller, Josh; Stewart, Therese; Stroud, Andy; Tayrani,
Amir C.; Thompson, David; Uno, Theodore; Van Aken, Christine; Washington, Brian; Gold,
Russell; Terry L. Thompson; Daniel Powell
Yes, Los Angeles County agrees to the stipulation. Thank you.
Judy Whitehurst
Principal Deputy County Counsel
Office of the Los Angeles County Counsel
500 West Temple Street, Rm. 652
Los Angeles, CA 90012
ph. 213-974-1845
fax 213-617-7182
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, from the Office of the County Counsel is intended for the official and confidential
use of the recipients to whom it is addressed. It contains information that may be confidential, privileged, attorney work product, or otherwise exempted from
disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, be advised that any review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction
of this message or its contents is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately by reply email that you have received this message in error, and destroy this
message, including any attachments.
From: Monagas, Enrique A. [mailto:EMonagas@gibsondunn.com]

Vince; Chou, Danny; Cooper, Chuck; Daly, Catheryn; Dettmer, Ethan D.; Dusseault, Christopher D.; Flynn, Ronald;
Claude; Lee, Mollie; Malzahn, Scott; Martinez, Judith; Martinez, Manuel; McGill, Matthew D.; Mennemeier, Kenneth C.;
Monagas, Enrique A.; Moss, Nicole; Nielson, Howard; Olson, Theodore B.; Pachter, Tamar; Panuccio, Jessie; Patterson,
Pete; Piepmeier, Sarah E.; Raum, Brian; Richardson, Beko; Schiller, Josh; Stewart, Therese; Stroud, Andy; Tayrani, Amir
C.; Thompson, David; Uno, Theodore; Van Aken, Christine; Washington, Brian; Whitehurst, Judy; Gold, Russell; Terry L.
Counsel,


1

Enrique A. Monagas
GIBSON DUNN
Tel +1 415.393.8353 • Fax +1 415.374.8403

==============================================================================
==============================================================================
2
Exhibit E
Monagas, Enrique A.
From: David Thompson [dthompson@cooperkirk.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 7:43 AM
Theodore J.; Burns, Gordon; Campbell, J; Chhabria, Vince; Chou, Danny; Chuck Cooper;
Evangelis; Knight, A; Kolm, Claude; Lee, Mollie; Malzahn, Scott; Martinez, Judith; Martinez,
Manuel; McGill, Matthew D.; Mennemeier, Kenneth C.; Nicole Moss; Howard Nielson; Olson,
Theodore B.; Pachter, Tamar; Jesse Panuccio; Pete Patterson; Piepmeier, Sarah E.; Raum,
Brian; Richardson, Beko; Schiller, Josh; Stewart, Therese; Stroud, Andy; Tayrani, Amir C.;
Uno, Theodore; Van Aken, Christine; Washington, Brian; Whitehurst, Judy; Gold, Russell;
Terry L. Thompson; Daniel Powell
Dear Mr. Monagas,
The proponents do not agree to the stipulation outlined below, nor do we agree to an
extension of time for the filing of a motion for attorneys' fees.
David Thompson
From: Monagas, Enrique A. [EMonagas@gibsondunn.com]
Vince; Chou, Danny; Chuck Cooper; Daly, Catheryn; Dettmer, Ethan D.; Dusseault, Christopher D.; Flynn, Ronald;
Claude; Lee, Mollie; Malzahn, Scott; Martinez, Judith; Martinez, Manuel; McGill, Matthew D.; Mennemeier, Kenneth C.;
Monagas, Enrique A.; Nicole Moss; Howard Nielson; Olson, Theodore B.; Pachter, Tamar; Jesse Panuccio; Pete Patterson;
Piepmeier, Sarah E.; Raum, Brian; Richardson, Beko; Schiller, Josh; Stewart, Therese; Stroud, Andy; Tayrani, Amir C.;
David Thompson; Uno, Theodore; Van Aken, Christine; Washington, Brian; Whitehurst, Judy; Gold, Russell; Terry L.
Counsel,



Enrique A. Monagas
1
GIBSON DUNN
Tel +1 415.393.8353 • Fax +1 415.374.8403

==============================================================================
==============================================================================

United States District Court Northern District of California

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

United States District Court Northern District of California

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document730 Filed08/17/10 Page1 of 4

1 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

20 KRISTIN M. PERRY, et al., CASE NO. 09-CV-2292 VRW

Gibson, Dunn &

1 I, Enrique A. Monagas, declare as follows:

7 and if called as a witness, I could and would competently testify hereto.

Gibson, Dunn &

1 6. Plaintiffs’ counsel contacted all parties involved in an attempt to obtain a stipulation to

6 Mark A. Jansson; and ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8, A Project of California Renewal

7 (“Defendant-Intervenors”) have not agreed to the extension.

17 a motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses.

20 motion for attorney’s fees and related expenses.

Gibson, Dunn &

4 /s/ Enrique A. Monagas

Gibson, Dunn &

The Administration Defendants will so stipulate.

Sent from my iPhone PLs excuse typos

The AG will so stipulate.

>>> "Monagas, Enrique A." <EMonagas@gibsondunn.com> 8/16/2010 2:59 PM >>>

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

CLAUDE KOLM I Deputy County Counsel

Yes, Los Angeles County agrees to the stipulation. Thank you.

From: Monagas, Enrique A. [mailto:EMonagas@gibsondunn.com]

Dear Mr. Monagas,

You might also like