Anderson v. Kelso, et al.

Filing 141

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 08/08/13 ordering plaintiff's request to depose Dr. Lee and Cummings is granted; plaintiff's request to depose Dr. Swingle is denied without prejudice; these depositions shall be conduc ted within 30 days from the date of this order. Within 7 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall file a short pleading addressing when his expert witness will be available for report and deposition. Within 7 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall file a statement regarding his client's filings. Failure to comply with this order will result in the imposition of sanctions. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SAMUEL ANDERSON,

12
13
14
15

No. 2: 12-cv-0261 MCE KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

J. CLARK KELSO, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding through counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant

18

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 12, 2013, the court ordered plaintiff to file a statement on or before

19

July 26, 2013 setting forth the depositions he feels are imperative to take. On July 26, 2013,

20

plaintiff filed this statement. Plaintiff states that he proposes to take the depositions of Dr. Lee,

21

Dr. Swingle and Dr. Cummings.

22

On August 1, 2013, defendants filed a response to plaintiff’s statement regarding the

23

proposed depositions. Defendants state that if the court permits plaintiff to conduct depositions,

24

he should be permitted to depose Dr. Lee and Dr. Cummings only. Defendants state that the

25

issues plaintiff intends to cover with Dr. Lee and Dr. Swingle overlap, and taking both

26

depositions would result in duplicative or cumulative testimony.

27
28

Good cause appearing, plaintiff is permitted to depose Dr. Lee and Dr. Cummings. For
the reasons stated by defendants in their August 1, 2013 pleading, plaintiff’s request to depose Dr.
1

1

Swingle is denied. If, however, after taking the depositions of Dr. Lee and Dr. Cummings,

2

plaintiff’s counsel can show that it is imperative that he depose Dr. Swingle, he may file a

3

renewed request to take Dr. Swingle’s deposition.

4

The July 12, 2013 order also directed plaintiff to address in his July 26, 2013 pleading

5

when his expert witness would be available for report and deposition. In his July 26, 2013

6

pleading, plaintiff states that he will seek to conduct expert discovery as well. Plaintiff does not

7

state when his expert will be available for report and deposition.

8
9

The July 12, 2013 order also directed plaintiff to file a statement regarding his client’s
filings on or before August 2, 2013. Plaintiff’s counsel did not file this briefing.

10

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1.

Plaintiff’s request to depose Dr. Lee and Cummings is granted; plaintiff’s request to

12

depose Dr. Swingle is denied without prejudice; these depositions shall be conducted

13

within thirty days of the date of this order;

14

2. Within seven days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file a short pleading

15
16

addressing when his expert witness will be available for report and deposition;
3. Within seven days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file his statement regarding
his client’s filings;

17
18
19

4. Failure to comply with this order will result in the imposition of sanctions.
Dated: August 8, 2013

20
21
22

an261.dep

23
24
25
26
27
28
2