Wormuth et al v. Lammersville Union School District et al

Filing 68

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 5/18/17 ORDERING that the court will not consider the emails submitted by defense counsel and the third-party. Should either the non-party, or any defendant on behalf of a non- party, wish to file an objection(s) it must do so in a properly-filed pleading that has been served on all parties.(Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13

ADRIANNA WORMUTH, SCOTT
WORMUTH and H.W., a minor, by and
through his guardians ad litem
ADRIANNA WORMUTH AND SCOTT
WORMUTH,

14
15
16
17
18

No. 2:15-cv-1572-KJM-EFB

ORDER

Plaintiffs,
v.
LAMMERSVILLE UNION SCHOOL
DISTRICT, JAMES YEAGER, DAWN
IBBS, TERESA HAUN, KIRK
NICHOLAS, and KHUSHWINDER GILL,
and DOES 1-30,

19

Defendants.

20
21

On May 17, 2017, the court received an email from a third-party objecting to the

22

disclosure of information contained in her daughter’s academic records pursuant to the court’s

23

May 4, 2017 order.1 See ECF No. 61. The following day, the court received two emails from the

24

law firm representing defendants Lammersville Union School District, James Yeager, Dawn Ibbs,

25
1

26
27
28

That order required defendants to provide, among other things, the names and contact
information of parents of certain students in A.S.’s class. It further required defendants’ counsel
to notify any parents objecting to disclosure of such information that they must, by no later than
May 17, 2017, file a motion for a protective order that provides a legal basis supporting their
objection.
1

1

Kirk Bicholas, and Khushwinder Gill, inquiring whether the court had receiving any third-party

2

objections. It does not appear that the third-party email or the two emails from defendants’

3

counsel were served on all parties to this action. Local Rule 135(d) provides that “[u]nless a

4

party expressly waives service, copies of all documents submitted to the Court shall be served

5

upon all parties to the action . . . .”

6

The emails constitute improper ex parte communications, which the court cannot and will

7

not consider. All communications with the court, including objections filed by third-parties, must

8

be properly filed in compliance with the court’s local rules. Accordingly, the court will not

9

consider the emails submitted by defense counsel and the third-party. Should either the non-

10

party, or any defendant on behalf of a non-party, wish to file an objection(s) it must do so in a

11

properly-filed pleading that has been served on all parties.

12

DATED: May 18, 2017.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2