Winters, et al v. Jordan, et al

Filing 374

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/9/13 ORDERING that Plaintiffs shall meet and confer in good faith with defendant Nevada County with respect to defendant's motions to compel. If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute informally, the parties shall file a joint statement regarding their discovery disagreement no later than 9/6/2013. The court will not consider any additional legal argument or briefing. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRENT WINTERS, et al.,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:09-cv-0522-JAM-KJN PS

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER

DELORES JORDAN, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Presently pending before the court are five motions to compel supplemental answers to

18

interrogatories propounded on plaintiffs Brent Winters, Cacey Winters, Christy Winters, Jennifer

19

Winters, and Susan Winters by defendant Nevada County Adult Protective Services (“Nevada

20

County”). (ECF Nos. 352, 354, 358, 361, 364.) The motions were initially noticed for hearing on

21

September 12, 2013, but in light of the court’s own unavailability on that date, the hearing on the

22

motions was continued by minute order to September 19, 2013. (ECF No. 373.)

23

Although the court presently takes no position with respect to the parties’ substantive

24

discovery dispute, it appears from defendant’s motion papers that plaintiffs failed to meet and

25

confer in good faith with respect to the parties’ discovery disagreement and failed to participate in

26

the preparation of a joint statement regarding the discovery disagreement in accordance with

27

Local Rule 251. In particular, plaintiffs apparently failed to respond to defendant Nevada

28

County’s meet-and-confer letters, telephone calls, and e-mails.
1

1

Local Rule 251 provides, in part, that:

2

[A] motion made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 through 37,
including any motion to exceed discovery limitations or motion for
protective order, shall not be heard unless (1) the parties have
conferred and attempted to resolve their differences, and (2) the
parties have set forth differences and the bases therefor in a Joint
Statement re Discovery Disagreement. Counsel for all interested
parties shall confer in advance of the filing of the motion or in
advance of the hearing of the motion in a good faith effort to
resolve the differences that are the subject of the motion. Counsel
for the moving party or prospective moving party shall be
responsible for arranging the conference, which shall be held at a
time and place and in a manner mutually convenient to counsel.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(b). Local Rule 251(c) sets forth the specific requirements for the contents of

10

the parties’ joint statement. Local Rule 251(d) provides that “[r]efusal of any counsel to

11

participate in a discovery conference, or refusal without good cause to execute the required joint

12

statement, shall be grounds, in the discretion of the Court, for entry of an order adverse to the

13

party represented by counsel so refusing or adverse to counsel.” The court’s Local Rules further

14

provide that “[a]ny individual representing himself or herself without an attorney is bound by the

15

Federal Rules of Civil or Criminal Procedure, these Rules, and all other applicable law. All

16

obligations placed on “counsel” by these Rules apply to individuals appearing in propria persona.

17

Failure to comply therewith may be ground for dismissal, judgment by default, or any other

18

sanction appropriate under these Rules.” E.D. Cal. L.R. 183(a).

19

In light of the above, plaintiffs are hereby ordered to meet and confer in good faith with

20

defendant Nevada County with respect to defendant’s motions to compel. The parties’ meet-and-

21

confer efforts shall include at least one personal meet-and-confer session, which may be

22

conducted by telephone. If the parties are ultimately unable to resolve their dispute informally,

23

the parties shall work together to prepare and file a joint statement regarding their discovery

24

disagreement in accordance with Local Rule 251.1 Apart from appropriate declarations setting

25

forth necessary facts for purposes of adjudicating the discovery dispute, the court will not

26

1

27
28

Because there is significant overlap between the interrogatories propounded on the various
plaintiffs and the issues raised by plaintiffs’ responses, the parties may file a single joint
statement addressing all five motions to compel, grouping the various interrogatories/issues as
appropriate.
2

1

consider any briefing or legal argument submitted other than what is contained in the parties’

2

joint statement.

3

Plaintiffs are cautioned that failure to cooperate in good faith in the meet-and-confer

4

process; failure to cooperate with the preparation and filing of the joint statement regarding the

5

discovery disagreement; or failure to otherwise comply with their obligations under Local Rule

6

251, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and this order, will result in the imposition of

7

sanctions pursuant to Rules 37 and 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, potentially

8

including a summary grant of defendant’s motion to compel, monetary sanctions, and/or

9

dismissal of the action with prejudice.

10

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1.

Plaintiffs shall meet and confer in good faith with defendant Nevada County with

12

respect to defendant’s motions to compel. The parties’ meet-and-confer efforts shall

13

include at least one personal meet-and-confer session, which may be conducted by

14

telephone.

15

2. If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute informally, the parties shall prepare

16

and file a joint statement regarding their discovery disagreement in accordance with

17

Local Rule 251 and this order no later than September 6, 2013. The court will not

18

consider any additional legal argument or briefing.

19

3. Plaintiffs are cautioned that failure to cooperate in good faith in the meet-and-confer

20

process; failure to cooperate with the preparation and filing of the joint statement

21

regarding the discovery disagreement; or failure to otherwise comply with their

22

obligations under Local Rule 251, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and this order,

23

will result in the imposition of sanctions pursuant to Rules 37 and 41(b) of the Federal

24

Rules of Civil Procedure, potentially including a summary grant of defendant’s motion

25

to compel, monetary sanctions, and/or dismissal of the action with prejudice.

26
27

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 9, 2013

28
3