Coleman, et al v. Schwarzenegger, et al

Filing 4335

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 2/13/13: Within five days from the date of this order defendants shall show cause in writing, if any they have, why plaintiffs' motion should not be granted. In the alternative, defen dants may moot plaintiffs' motion by refiling within five days their objections omitting the material at page 2, lines 2 through 5 together with a request to the Clerk of the Court to remove documents 4312 and 4314 from the record in this action. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

RALPH COLEMAN, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

11
vs.

12
13

No. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK JFM P

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., et al.,
Defendants.

14

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
/

15

On January 28, 2013, defendants filed objections and a motion to strike or modify

16
17

portions of the Special Master’s twenty-fifth round monitoring report (hereafter “objections”).1

18

An amended version of this document was filed on January 29, 2013, adding an indexed table of

19

contents and authorities. On February 11, 2013, plaintiffs filed a motion to strike that portion of

20

defendants’ objections which makes an unsupported personal attack on the integrity of the

21

Special Master, (contained at page 2, lines 2 through 5 of the objections).

22

Specifically, plaintiffs seek an order directing the Clerk of the Court to strike the

23

January 28, 2013 objections and the January 29, 2013 amended objections from the record, and

24

/////

25
26

1

Pursuant to court order that report was filed on January 18, 2013.
1

1

permitting defendants to refile their objections without the personal attack. Plaintiffs’ motion is

2

noticed for hearing before the undersigned on March 11, 2013.
As plaintiffs point out, defendants’ attack consists of a raw assertion of unethical

3
4

conduct, with no supporting evidence nor even any hint that defendants actually believe the

5

attack they make. This court takes very seriously any allegation of unethical conduct. It would

6

not countenance any attempt by plaintiffs, or anyone, to prevent defendants from making any

7

non-frivolous assertions having evidentiary support, and made for purposes other than

8

harassment or other improper purpose. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b). However, the court can only

9

be dismayed by the cavalier manner in which defendants, in objections signed by their attorney

10

of record, level a smear against the character and reputation of the Special Master, without any

11

apparent regard for whether the attack is consistent with defense counsel’s obligations under

12

Rule 11 (providing sanctions for presenting pleadings without an evidentiary basis, or made to

13

harass, or for other improper purposes).

14

Accordingly, good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

15

1. Within five days from the date of this order defendants shall show cause in

16

writing, if any they have, why plaintiffs’ motion should not be granted; and
2. In the alternative, defendants may moot plaintiffs’ motion by refiling within

17
18

five days their objections omitting the material at page 2, lines 2 through 5 together with a

19

request to the Clerk of the Court to remove documents 4312 and 4314 from the record in this

20

action.

21

DATED: February 13, 2013.

22
23
24
25
26
2