Berry v. Yosemite Community College District et al

Filing 60

Order GRANTING IN PART Defendants' 48 Motion to Compel and Ordering further disclosures; Order modifying scheduling order, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 1/30/2019. Plaintiff's list/statement due by 3/4/2019; Non expert disclosure due by 4/15/2019; Initial Expert Disclosure due by 6/17/2019; Expert Rebuttal/Supplemental due by 7/15/2019; Expert Discovery due by 8/12/2019; Non-Dispositive Motions filed by 8/26/2019; Dispositive Motions filed by 9/9/2019; Pretrial Conference set for 12/6/2019 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill; Jury Trial set for 3/3/2020 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. (Rosales, O.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10

DEBRA BERRY,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13

v.
YOSEMITE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT, et al.,

14
15

Defendant.

Case No. 1:16-cv-00411-LJO-EPG
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL
AND ORDERING FURTHER DISCLOSURES
(ECF No. 48)
ORDER MODIFYING SCHEDULING
ORDER
THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE

16
17
18

Debra Berry (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 2000d.

19

On January 4, 2019, Defendants filed a motion to compel, requesting sanctions and

20

additional deposition testimony. (ECF No. 48.) The Court held a hearing on January 25, 2018.

21

(ECF No. 59.) Plaintiff appeared telephonically and Ms. Kellie M. Murphy, attorney for

22

Defendants, appeared telephonically.

23
24
25
26
27
28

For the reasons stated on the record, Defendants’ motion to compel is granted in part
and denied in part.
Plaintiff is ordered within thirty (30) days from the date of this order to provide
defendants the following in writing and under oath:
1. A list of all cases Plaintiff was involved in within the last 10 years, including,
the case name, case number, and a brief description of the subject matter;
1

1

2. A written statement as to whether Plaintiff claims emotional distress damages,
and if so the specific basis of that claim1; and

2
3

3. A statement stating whether Plaintiff has any documents that she looked at

4

during her deposition, which have not already been provided to defendants. If

5

so, describe the documents.

6
7

Defendants have leave to file a supplement to their motion to compel requesting further
information within 14 days after receipt of Plaintiff’s submission.

8
9

Also as discussed on the record, the Court also finds good cause to further modify the
Scheduling Order, (ECF Nos. 28, 47). The Court makes this modification with the

10

understanding that the parties will participate in a settlement conference to be set in May 2019.

11

Accordingly, the schedule in this action is further modified as follows:
Current Date
Non-Expert Disclosure
November 16, 2018
Initial Expert Disclosure:
February 25, 2019
Expert Rebuttal/Supplemental:
March 25, 2019
Expert Discovery Cut-off:
April 29, 2019
Non-Dispositive Motion Filing:
May 6, 2019
Dispositive Motion Filing:
May 28, 2019
Dispositive Motion Hearing:
June 27, 2019
Pretrial Conference:
August 8, 2019
Jury Trial:
November 5, 2019

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

New Date
April 15, 2019
June 17, 2019
July 15, 2019
August 12, 2019
August 26, 2019
September 9, 2019
October 4, 2019
December 6, 2019
March 3, 2020

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
Dated:

21

January 30, 2019

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

“When a plaintiff puts his mental health at issue by alleging emotional distress, he waives his psychologistpatient privilege for relevant mental health records. The defendant is entitled to discover any records relevant to
the plaintiff's emotional distress. . . . [S]uch records and testimony are relevant in showing causation or the degree
of the alleged emotional distress. Even if the plaintiff stipulates that he will not introduce any psychologist or
expert testimony, the records may still be relevant to show causation and magnitude.” Carrig v. Kellogg USA Inc.,
CASE NO. C12-837RSM, 2013 WL 392715 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 30, 2013).
1

2