Orr v. Brame, et al

Filing 75

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 2/9/2015 ORDERING that Exhibit 26 (ECF 54 -25) to the 54 Declaration of T. Kennedy Helm in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is sealed. Plaintiff to file a new Exhibit 26 to replace it that does not contain any material that Defendants consider confidential. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
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 LLP 505 Seventeenth Street Oakland, California 94612 Telephone: (510) 452-5500 Fax: (510) 452-5510 Attorneys for Plaintiff HARRISON LUTHER ORR 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 13 14 HARRISON LUTHER ORR, Individually, Plaintiff, vs. 15 16 17 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 20 Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING SEALING OR LOCKING ECF 54-25 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB: STIP. AND PROPOSED ORDER TO SEAL/LOCK ECF 54-25. 1 The parties in this case, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate, and 2 request this Court to order, that Exhibit 26 (ECF 54-25) to the Declaration of T. Kennedy Helm in 3 Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF 54) be sealed or locked. 4 Plaintiff will replace the current Exhibit 26 with a new Exhibit 26 containing no confidential 5 material. This joint request is based on the following: 6 1. Defendants inadvertently did not clearly designate the material comprising Exhibit 7 26 (ECF 54-25) as confidential pursuant to the terms of the Protective Order (ECF 8 30) until after Plaintiff had filed it as an exhibit and Plaintiff did not give notice 9 beforehand to Defendants that it was filing ECF 54-25. 10 2. Defendant State of California, appearing by and through the Department of 11 California Highway Patrol (CHP), greys out sections of the Highway Patrol Manual 12 (HPM) to indicate material which it restricts from public disclosure because such 13 disclosure could jeopardize officer safety. 14 15 16 17 18 19 3. Plaintiff’s current Exhibit 26 (ECF 54-25) contains a substantial amount of greyedout text in HPM 70.6, Chapter 2. 4. Defendants are concerned that the material in Exhibit 26 (ECF 54-25) should not be in the public domain for officer-safety reasons. 5. Plaintiff agrees to file a new Exhibit 26 which Defendants agree contains no confidential material that requires it to be sealed. 20 21 SO STIPULATED. 22 Dated: January 28, 2015 HADDAD & SHERWIN LLP 23 24 25 26 /s/ T. Kennedy Helm T. KENNEDY HELM Attorneys for Plaintiff HARRISON LUTHER ORR 27 28 2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB: STIP. AND PROPOSED ORDER TO SEAL/LOCK ECF 54-25 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Dated: February 4, 2015 KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California PETER A. MESHOT Supervising Deputy Attorney General /s/ Stephen C. Pass* STEPHEN C. PASS Deputy Attorney General Attorney for Defendants STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPEARING BY AND THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, TERRY PLUMB AND JAY BRAME 8 * Mr. Pass provided his consent that this document be electronically filed. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB: STIP. AND PROPOSED ORDER TO SEAL/LOCK ECF 54-25 2 1 2 ORDER This Court orders that Exhibit 26 (ECF 54-25) to the Declaration of T. Kennedy Helm in 3 Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 54) be sealed. Plaintiff will file a new 4 Exhibit 26 to replace it that does not contain any material that Defendants consider confidential. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: February 9, 2015 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2:14-cv-0585-WBS-EFB: STIP. AND PROPOSED ORDER TO SEAL DOC. 54-25.

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?