Espinoza v. City of Tracy et al

Filing 61

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/2/18 ORDERING that Defendants' Motion for Sanctions 53 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. No later than 2/8/18, Plaintiffs counsel shall personally pay defendants' counsel $ 2,000.00 in monetary sanctions based on his failure to comply with his discovery obligations and the court's 12/15/17 order, requiring defendants to resort to motion practice. Plaintiffs counsel shall not directly or indirectly attempt to recove r the amount of such sanctions from his client. No later than 2/6/18, Plaintiff shall provide to defendants all supplemental responses, documents, privilege logs, and amended initial disclosures that were previously ordered produced in the court' ;s 12/15/17 order. Defendants' request for evidence preclusion sanctions is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Fact Discovery shall be completed by 3/15/18. Defendants' Expert Disclosures and Reports shall be due 2/27/18. With regard to expert testimony intended solely for rebuttal, those experts shall be disclosed and reports produced on or before 3/20/18. Any expert depositions shall be completed by 4/9/18. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JUAN ESPINOZA

12
13
14

No. 2:15-cv-751-WBS-KJN

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

CITY OF TRACY, et al.,

15
16

Defendants.

17
18

Presently pending before the court is defendants’ motion for discovery sanctions, which

19

came on for hearing on February 1, 2018. (ECF No. 53.) At the hearing, attorney Russell

20

Robinson appeared telephonically on behalf of plaintiff, and attorney Arlin Kachalia appeared in

21

person on behalf of defendants. In both his declaration in opposition to the motion, as well as his

22

representations at the hearing, Mr. Robinson largely conceded that he had not complied with his

23

discovery obligations and, more specifically, with the court’s prior December 15, 2017 order to

24

provide certain discovery and disclosure materials.

25
26
27
28

After carefully reviewing the parties’ written briefing (ECF Nos. 53, 54, 59), and for the
reasons stated on the record at the hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants’ motion for sanctions (ECF No. 53) is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART.
1

1

2. No later than February 8, 2018, plaintiff’s counsel shall personally pay defendants’

2

counsel $2,000.00 in monetary sanctions based on his failure to comply with his

3

discovery obligations and the court’s December 15, 2017 order, requiring defendants

4

to resort to motion practice. Plaintiff’s counsel shall not directly or indirectly attempt

5

to recover the amount of such sanctions from his client.

6

3. No later than February 6, 2018, plaintiff shall provide to defendants all supplemental

7

responses, documents, privilege logs, and amended initial disclosures that were

8

previously ordered produced in the court’s December 15, 2017 order. (See ECF No.

9

52.)

10

4. Defendants’ request for evidence preclusion sanctions is DENIED WITHOUT

11

PREJUDICE, subject to potential renewal at a later juncture if appropriate. Instead, in

12

an attempt to first impose lesser sanctions, the court imposes the above-mentioned

13

monetary sanctions and modifies the court’s April 4, 2017 pretrial scheduling order

14

(ECF No. 47) to allow the following unilateral extensions for DEFENDANTS

15

ONLY:1

16

a. Fact discovery shall be so conducted as to be completed by March 15, 2018.

17

b. Defendants’ expert disclosures and reports in accordance with Federal Rule of

18

Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) shall be due February 27, 2018. With regard to expert

19

testimony intended solely for rebuttal, those experts shall be disclosed and

20

reports produced in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)

21

on or before March 20, 2018. Any expert depositions shall be completed by

22

April 9, 2018.

23

c. All other case deadlines remain unchanged.

24

5. Plaintiff is hereby cautioned that failure to strictly comply with the deadlines and

25
26
27
28

provisions of this order, failure to timely comply with discovery obligations, and/or
1

To the extent that plaintiff contends that an extension of any current case deadline applicable to
plaintiff is warranted, plaintiff shall first meet and confer with defendants in an attempt to seek an
appropriate stipulation for the court’s consideration. If unsuccessful, plaintiff may then file an
appropriate motion setting forth good cause for modification of the scheduling order.
2

1

further undue delay of the action may result in the imposition of case-dispositive

2

terminating sanctions.

3

6. Plaintiff’s counsel shall serve a copy of this order on his client.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated: February 2, 2018

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3