Belyew v. Lorman et al

Filing 171

ORDER signed by District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta on 01/25/24 DENYING 145 Motion to Compel and GRANTING 162 Motion to Quash. (Benson, A.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

LISA MARIE PEREZ, formerly known as
LISA MARIE BELYEW,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15

v.

No. 2:17-cv-00723-DJC-CKD

ORDER

LARRY LORMAN,
Defendant.

16

Before the Court are Plaintiff Lisa Perez’s Motion to Compel a Color Booking

17
18

Photo taken during her arrest (ECF No. 145) and Defendant’s Motion to Quash

19

subpoenas sent by Plaintiff related to the same photo (ECF No. 162)
The Magistrate Judge has previously addressed a similar request from Plaintiff

20
21

in an Order issued April 11, 2023. (ECF No. 95.) There the Magistrate Judge

22

determined that the Court did not have the authority to order the production of the

23

photo from Colusa County. Plaintiff states that she has since sent a letter to the

24

County (though the letter attached to her motion does not indicate a recipient) and is

25

now renewing her request. Plaintiff’s informal request to the County does not change

26

the Court’s lack of authority to compel production of the photo. This Motion is

27

DENIED.

28

////
1

1

Relatedly, on or about October 10, 2023, Plaintiff sent two subpoenas to

2

Joshua Fitch, Chief of the Colusa County Police Department: one requesting that the

3

Chief Fitch appear and testify about the booking photo at the status conference set for

4

February 15, 2023, and one requesting that he bring the booking photo to the same.

5

(ECF No. 162, 1–2; id., Exs. A and B.) Defendant objects that these subpoenas are

6

improper and has filed a Motion to Quash. (Id. at 1.)

7

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, which governs subpoenas, requires that

8

proof of service of the subpoenas be issued with the Court, and, if the subpoena

9

requests the production of documents before trial, it requires that the party issuing

10

the subpoena notify the other party before service. Plaintiff has failed to comply with

11

these rules and her subpoenas are therefore improper. The Motion to Quash is

12

GRANTED.

13
14

For the above reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

15
16

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel, ECF No. 145, is DENIED; and

17

2. Defendant’s Motion to Quash, ECF 162, is GRANTED.

18
19
20
21

Dated: January 25, 2024

/s/ Daniel J. Calabretta
THE HONORABLE DANIEL J. CALABRETTA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2