Gonzalez v. Razo et al

Filing 72

ORDER VACATING HEARING and GRANTING IN PART 70 Motion for Facilitated Confidential Attorney/Client Phone Calls; ORDER to Facilitate Telephone Call signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 6/23/2017. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 MANUEL ANTONIO GONZALEZ, 7 Plaintiff, 8 9 1:15-cv-01098-DAD-EPG (PC) ORDER VACATING HEARING AND GRANTING IN PART MOTION FOR FACILITATED CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY/CLIENT PHONE CALLS (ECF NO. 70) v. J. RAZO, et al., 10 Defendants. ORDER TO FACILITATE TELEPHONE CALL 11 12 13 Manuel Antonio Gonzalez (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner, and is the plaintiff in this 14 civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which includes attendant state law claims. 15 Plaintiff is represented by attorney Stanley Goff. 16 On June 21, 2017, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion for facilitated confidential 17 attorney/client phone calls (“the Motion”), which he noticed for hearing on July 21, 2017, at 18 10:00 a.m. 19 confidential attorney/client phone calls between him and his client so that Plaintiff can 20 diligently prosecute this case. 21 22 (ECF No. 70). Plaintiff’s counsel asks that the Court grant him (as needed) Because this motion does not affect Defendants, the Court will treat the motion as an ex parte motion, and vacate the hearing. 23 The Court will grant the Motion in part. Communication between Plaintiff’s counsel 24 and his client, Manuel Gonzalez, is required in order for Plaintiff and his attorney to prosecute 25 this case.1 Accordingly, the Court will allow for a confidential telephone call between Plaintiff 26 27 1 28 The Court notes that Plaintiff has had trouble getting into contact with his attorney in regards to this case. (See, e.g., ECF No. 66). While it is not clear why Plaintiff has had this trouble, it seems that this is not the first time one of Mr. Goff’s clients has had trouble getting in contact with Mr. Goff. In a previous case, Mr. 1 1 and his attorney. 2 attorney/client telephone calls, which may not be needed and can hopefully be handled in the 3 normal course through coordination with the prison. However, the Court will not grant blanket authority for confidential 4 In the future, if Plaintiff’s counsel requires a confidential telephone call with his client 5 and the prison is not permitting that request, he should file an ex parte application seeking that 6 relief and state the efforts made to coordinate the call through the prison. 7 By this order, the Court directs the Warden and the correctional staff at Richard J. 8 Donovan Correctional Facility to facilitate a confidential telephone call between attorney 9 Stanley Goff and his client, inmate Manuel Gonzalez (T-42888) as follows. 10 In accordance with the above, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 11 1. The Motion is GRANTED IN PART; 12 2. The Warden, Litigation Coordinator, and other correctional staff as needed at 13 Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility shall facilitate a confidential telephone 14 call between Manuel Gonzalez and attorney Stanley Goff; 15 3. The confidential telephone call shall be placed on Thursday, June 29, to begin 16 at 3:00 p.m., and shall continue, without interruption, for a maximum of sixty 17 (60) minutes or until completed, whichever is earlier. Correctional staff shall 18 initiate the telephone call by calling attorney Goff at (415)-571-9570; 19 4. The telephone conversation shall be a confidential communication between 20 attorney Goff and his client and conducted so as not to be overheard by 21 correctional staff or others. 22 Gonzalez under visual surveillance during the telephone conversation; 23 Correctional staff, however, may keep inmate 5. Failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions; and 24 \\\ 25 \\\ 26 \\\ 27 28 Goff was directed by the court to communicate with his client. (Cardoza v. Tann, Case No. 1:11-cv-01386, Eastern District of California, ECF Nos. 94 & 95) 2 1 6. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve this order by facsimile ((619)-671-7566) 2 and email on both the Warden and the Litigation Coordinator at Richard J. 3 Donovan Correctional Facility. 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 23, 2017 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?