Whitten v. Frontier Communications Corporation et al

Filing 27

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 3/13/14 GRANTING in part and DENYING in part Plaintiff's 23 Motion for Discovery and GRANTING Defendant Frontier's 22 Motion to Compel. (Manzer, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

MARGARET HART EDWARDS, Bar No. 65699
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
650 California Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94108.2693
Telephone:
415.433.1940
ADRIANNE B. OSTROWSKI, Bar No. 238786
BARBARA A. BLACKBURN, Bar No. 253731
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
500 Capitol Mall, Suite 2000
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone:
916.830.7200
Attorneys for Defendants
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS
CORPORATION, CITIZENS TELECOM
SERVICES COMPANY, L.L.C., AND KEVIN
MAILLOUX
GEORGE DUESDIEKER
LAW OFFICE OF GEORGE DUEDIEKER
405 El Camino Real #107
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone:
[phone]
Attorney for Plaintiff
PHYLLIS WHITTEN

15
16

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17
18

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PHYLLIS WHITTEN,

19
20
21
22
23
24

Case No. 2:12−CV−02926−TLN−EFB

Plaintiff,
v.
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS
CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation,
CITIZENS TELECOM SERVICES CO.,
KEVIN MAILLOUX, and Doe 1 through
Doe 10,

[PROPOSED] ORDER AFTER HEARING
ON DISCOVERY DISPUTE

Defendants.

25
26
27
28
Firmwide:125843782.1 064194.1023

Case No. 2:12−CV−02926−TLN−EFB

[PROPOSED] ORDER AFTER HEARING ON DISCOVERY DISPUTE

1

This matter came before the Court on February 26, 2014 with respect to three discovery disputes.

2

(Dockets 22 & 23). Barbara A. Blackburn, Littler Mendelson, P.C. appeared on behalf of Defendant Frontier

3

Communications Corporation (“Frontier”), George Duesdieker appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Based on

4

the pleadings in the file and the arguments of counsel, the Court rules as follows:

5

1.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel answers to Plaintiff’s first set of interrogatories (salary

6

information) is granted as to interrogatories 1, 2, 4 & 5, but denied as to interrogatory 3. Any answers will be

7

subject to the parties’ stipulated protective order. Such interrogatory answers will be provided to Plaintiff no

8

later than March 19, 2014.

9
10
11
12

2.

Plaintiff’s motion seeking a determination that the attorney-client privilege does not apply to

her advice regarding use of the U.S. flag in Defendant Frontier’s marketing, is denied.
3.

Defendant Frontier’s motion to compel answers to its Special Interrogatories Nos. 4 and 5 is

granted. Such interrogatory answers will be provided to Defendant no later than March 19, 2014.

13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

DATED: March 13, 2014.

17

_____________________________________
HONORABLE EDMUND F. BRENNAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

20
21

DATED: March 10, 2014

/s/ Barbara A. Blackburn
Barbara A. Blackburn

DATED: March 10, 2014

/s/ George Duesdieker (approved on 03/10/14)

22
23

George Duesdieker

24
25
26
27
28

Firmwide:125843782.1 064194.1023

2.

Case No. 2:12−CV−02926−TLN−EFB

[PROPOSED] ORDER AFTER HEARING ON DISCOVERY DISPUTE