Orr v. Brame, et al

Filing 47

STIPULATION and ORDER 45 re depositions of Expert and Other Witnesses signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/13/2014. Parties may complete non-medical expert depositions by no later than 11/30/2014. Mr. Clark's deposition is curren tly scheduled for 11/20/2014. Parties also stipulate to extend deadline for medical expert depositions only to 12/31/2014. Finally, Parties agree that plaintiff may depose PMK on "take-downs" and may depose Officer Gutierrez by no later than 11/30/2014. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

MICHAEL J. HADDAD (State Bar No. 189114)
JULIA SHERWIN (State Bar No. 189268)
GENEVIEVE K. GUERTIN (State Bar No. 262479)
T. KENNEDY HELM (State Bar No. 282319)
HADDAD & SHERWIN
505 Seventeenth Street
Oakland, California 94612
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
HARRISON LUTHER ORR

8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

HARRISON LUTHER ORR,
Individually,

13

Plaintiff,

14

vs.

15

18

CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, a
public entity; STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
a public entity; CALIFORNIA
HIGHWAY PATROL OFFICERS
BRAME, PLUMB, and DOES 1-10,
individually,

19

Defendants.

16
17

20

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB

STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED)
ORDER RE: DEPOSITIONS OF
EXPERT AND OTHER WITNESSES

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB: STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER RE: DEPOSITIONS OF EXPERT AND
OTHER WITNESSES

1

1
2

ALL PARTIES, THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD, HEREBY
STIPULATE as follows:

3

This case was filed on March 3, 2014. (Doc. 2). Defendants Answered on April 14, 2014

4

(Doc. 8). The Pretrial Scheduling Order was entered on May 27, 2014. (Doc. 14). The Order to

5

Amend Scheduling Order to Continue Discovery/Motion Deadlines, Pretrial Conference, and Trial

6
7
8
9

was entered on August 27, 2014 (Doc. 26). Currently, discovery is scheduled to close on (and all
discovery motions must be heard by) November 7, 2014. Expert Discovery is scheduled to close
on November 14, 2014. Trial is scheduled for June 2, 2015. (Doc. 26).
On October 14, 2014, Plaintiff noticed for October 28, 2014 the following depositions:
1. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6), the person most knowledgeable on

10
behalf of the California Highway Patrol concerning the training, policies, and procedures,
11
from three years preceding the incident described in the First Amended Complaint to the
12
present, regarding ''take-downs," leg sweeps, and other control/force techniques to place a
13
person on the ground; and
14
2. California Highway Patrol Officer Gutierrez (#1607).
15
On October 27, 2014, Defendants informed Plaintiff that they would not produce Officer
16
17
18
19

Gutierrez without Plaintiff serving him with a subpoena because Defendants contend he is not a
“managing agent” of CHP.
Defendants further state with respect to this witness: Defendants also informed
Plaintiff that Defendants were cancelling the previously noticed October 28, 2014 deposition of

20

the PMK on "take-downs." As to the PMK deposition, Defendants position was that they required

21

more time to prepare a PMK deponent to testify due to Plaintiff’s statement in his October 22,

22

2014 Plaintiff’s Expert Disclosures that he “reserves the right to elicit expert testimony from. . .all

23

Persons Most Knowledgeable under Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6) identified by Defendants. . . .”

24

Defendants said they would produce the PMK witness noticed for October 28th at a mutually

25

agreeable date in November, 2014 and offered to stipulate to extend time to November 30, 2014 to

26

conduct that deposition. An existing Order (Doc. 36) allows Plaintiff to depose four other PMK

27

witnesses in the same timeframe. If Plaintiff agreed to that, Defendant also agreed to stipulate to

28

2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB: STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER RE: DEPOSITIONS OF EXPERT AND
OTHER WITNESSES

1

1

the same time extension to depose Officer Gutierriez, and also to produce Officer Gutierriez at a

2

mutually agreeable date during that time period pursuant to notice only without a subpoena.

3

Additionally, due to scheduling conflicts for both counsel and the witnesses, the parties

4

will be unable to complete expert depositions prior to the expert discovery cut-off date of

5

November 14, 2014.

6
7
8
9

Defendants have not yet received Plaintiff’s medical records from the Sacramento
Veterans Administration Hospital pursuant to their subpoena. That is because that facility
required an authorization from Plaintiff, which Plaintiff has already provided to Defendants’
subpoena service. Pursuant to the Court’s Order re Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash (Doc. 29, 3:1-11),
Defendants have been unable to review Plaintiff’s other medical records, as they are required to

10
11
12
13
14

keep them sealed until they jointly review them with Plaintiff’s counsel. As the V.A. records
constitute the majority of Plaintiff’s medical records, the parties are waiting for the V.A. records
before performing the joint review. Defendant’s counsel states he will not be in a position to
determine which treating physicians, if any, to depose or to properly conduct such depositions
until they have a reasonable opportunity to review the medical records.

15

Accordingly, the parties stipulate that the parties may complete non-medical expert

16

depositions by no later than November 30, 2014. Mr. Clark's deposition is currently scheduled for

17

November 20, 2014. The parties also stipulate to extend the deadline for medical expert

18

depositions only to December 31, 2014. Finally, the parties stipulate that Plaintiff may depose the

19

PMK on "take-downs" and may depose Officer Gutierrez by no later than November 30, 2014.

20
21

All other dates in this matter shall remain unchanged.

22
23

Dated: November 7, 2014

HADDAD & SHERWIN

24
25
26

/s/ Genevieve K. Guertin
GENEVIEVE K. GUERTIN
Attorneys for Plaintiff
HARRISON LUTHER ORR

____

27
28

2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB: STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER RE: DEPOSITIONS OF EXPERT AND
OTHER WITNESSES

2

1
2
3
4

Dated: November 7, 2014

5

KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General of California
PETER A. MESHOT
Supervising Deputy Attorney General

6
7

/s/ Stephen C. Pass*____
_
STEPHEN C. PASS
Deputy Attorney General
Attorney for Defendants
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, CHP
OFFICERS BRAME and PLUMB

8
9
10
11

* Mr. Pass provided his consent that this document be electronically filed.

12
13

(PROPOSED) ORDER

14

Pursuant to stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS SO

15
16

ORDERED.
Dated: November 13, 2014.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB: STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER RE: DEPOSITIONS OF EXPERT AND
OTHER WITNESSES

3