Ruff v. Zumwalt, et al

Filing 121

ORDER signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 4/23/2009 on 112 MOTION IN LIMINE Motion to Preclude Defendants' Witnesses and Evidence Not Disclosed During Discovery filed by Daniel Eugene Ruff. (Jury Trial set for 9/15/2009 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 3 (OWW) before Judge Oliver W. Wanger and Pretrial Conference set for 8/3/2009 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 3 (OWW) before Judge Oliver W. Wanger). (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Leslie M. Dillahunty, Esq. Bar No. 195262 WEAKLEY, ARENDT & McGUIRE 1 6 3 0 East Shaw Avenue, Suite 176 F r e sn o , California 93710 T e le p h o n e : (559) 221-5256 F a c sim i le : (559) 221-5262 Attorneys for Defendants, County of Kings, Mark Sherman, Sandy R. Roper and William R. Zumwalt IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On April 21, 2009, the plaintiff's motion to preclude defense witnesses and evidence withheld during discovery came on regularly for hearing before The Honorable Oliver W. Wanger. Plaintiff was represented by Kevin G. Little, Esq. Defendants County of Kings, Mark Sherman, Sandy R. Roper, William R. Zumwalt (collectively hereinafter "Defendants") were represented by Leslie M. Dillahunty, Esq., of the law firm of Weakley, Arendt, & McGuire, LLP. After full consideration of the moving and opposition papers, as well as oral argument from counsel, for good cause established, not within the control or the ability of the Defendants, the Court finds good cause under the Discovery Act to permit the following supplementation of discovery in aid of trial preparation as follows: I.. SUPPLEMENTAL DISCOVERY. A. Defendants shall, within seven (7) court days (on or before April 30, 2009), DANIEL E. RUFF, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) vs. ) ) COUNTY OF KINGS, MARK SHERMAN, ) SANDY R. ROPER, WILLIAM R. ) ZUMWALT, and DOES 1-100, et al. ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________ ) CASE NO. 1:05-CV-00631-OWW-GSA ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO PRECLUDE WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE Date: April 21, 2009 Time: 1:30 p.m. Courtroom: Three Honorable Oliver W. Wanger Trial: September 15, 2009 ____________________________ Order on Plaintiff's Motion to Preclude Witnesses and Documents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 supplement specific discovery requests as follows: First Set of interrogatories: numbers 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16. First Request for Production of Documents: numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. First Request for Admissions: numbers 2 and 3. Second Set of interrogatories: numbers 1-4, 6 and 8. Second Request for Production of Documents: numbers 1-4, 6 and 7. Second Request for Admissions: numbers 1-4. Third Request for production of Documents: all. B. Defendants are to identify and produce all documents, maps, plans, or any other documentary evidence in support of any updated General Plan, amended General Plan, incorporation of any fringe into the City of Hanford and/or provisions of public services to the general public. C. Defendants are to identify any other witnesses known by the defendants with knowledge of facts and circumstances pertaining to the subject matter of plaintiff's allegations, and include the substance of testimony anticipated to be elicited from the witnesses, both lay and expert. D. Defendants are to identify and produce documentation any and all applications for site plan review referred to the City of Hanford for possible annexation after the January 2004 amendment to the Kings County General Plan; the "corrected" Grant Deed for the premises located at 11180 South 10th Avenue, Hanford, California; and documentation pertaining to the recycling business located at 14050 Locust Avenue, Armona, California. II. SUPPLEMENTAL OF EXPERT REPORTS. Defendants shall, within seven (7) court days (on or before April 30, 2009), supplement all expert declarations and/or reports to include any additional information and any statements of additional opinions not previously expressed. Defendants are to also identify any other documents, exhibits, physical or documentary, upon which their experts are expected to rely, /// /// ____________________________ Order on Plaintiff's Motion to Preclude Witnesses and Documents 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 including any survey, test or other analysis of the General Plan or the consolidation of services. III. DEPOSITIONS. Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of defendants' supplemental discovery and expert reports to conduct depositions, both lay and expert depositions. Defendants shall then have a subsequent thirty (30) days to conduct depositions, both lay and expert depositions. IV. MISCELLANEOUS. A copy of the compact disc mentioned by plaintiff's counsel as containing the "compendium of additional materials relied upon by plaintiff's experts" will be produced to defendants' counsel, at defendants' counsel's expense. All non-dispositive and dispositive motions are hereby deemed resolved, and this order does not re-open discovery except as expressly set forth above. The trial in this matter is now scheduled to commence on September 15, 2009, with the pre-trial conference scheduled for August 3, 2009. Approved as to form and content. /s/ Kevin G. Little By:___________________________________ Kevin G. Little Attorney for Plaintiff IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ____________________________ Order on Plaintiff's Motion to Preclude Witnesses and Documents Dated: April 23, 2009 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?