Dayton v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., et. al.
Filing
24
ORDER denying 21 Motion to Compel signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 8/29/13: The court finds an award of expenses is not warranted considering all of the circumstances reflected in the record before it on this motion. (Kaminski, H)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JUDY DAYTON,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:12-cv-1945 TLN CKD
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO., et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Defendants’ motion to compel deposition testimony and production of documents came
18
on regularly for hearing on August 28, 2013. Jennet Zapata appeared for plaintiff. Gary Basham
19
appeared for defendants. Upon review of the documents in support and opposition, upon hearing
20
the arguments of counsel, and good cause appearing therefor, THE COURT FINDS AND
21
ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
22
1. Objections to the deposition of plaintiff’s attorney Galen Shimoda have not been
23
waived. Defendants have failed to show that no other means exist to obtain the information, the
24
information sought is relevant and unprivileged, and the information is crucial to the preparation
25
of the case. See Spectra-Physics, Inc. v. Super. Ct. (Teledyne, Inc.), 198 Cal. App. 3d 1487
26
(1988); see also Shelton v. American Motors Corp., 805 F.2d 1323, 1327 (8th Cir. 1986)
27
(information sought via deposition of opposing counsel would reveal mental impressions and thus
28
protected by work product doctrine). Depositions of plaintiff’s law firm and counselor will
1
1
therefore not be allowed. Plaintiff’s counsel has provided an affidavit that all documents
2
responsive to the deposition subpoenas have been produced. The motion to compel (ECF No. 21)
3
is accordingly denied. In light of plaintiff’s deposition testimony and the requests for admission
4
which have previously been propounded by defendants, expanding the presumptive limit on the
5
number of interrogatories under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33 is not merited.
6
2. The court finds an award of expenses is not warranted considering all of the
7
circumstances reflected in the record before it on this motion. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 (a)(5).
8
Dated: August 29, 2013
_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
9
10
11
12
4 dayton-sears3.oah
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?