Castro v. Terhune, et al

Filing 336

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO ALLOW SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT REPORTS by Judge Alsup granting 329 Motion (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/18/2010)

Castro v. Terhune, et al

Doc. 336

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 CARLOS CASTRO, Plaintiff, v. CAL TERHUNE, DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, BONNIE G. GARIBAY, J. BATCHELOR, S.C. WOLHWEND, A. SCRIBNER, J. STOKES, M. YARBOROUGH, L. HOOD, C. CAMPBELL, A.M. GONZALEZ, M. AYALA, E. DERUSHA, C/O ROBERT L. AYERS, WARDEN, J. MARTINEZ, Defendants. / ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO ALLOW SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT REPORTS RE WAIVED DOCUMENTS No. C 98-04877 WHA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

On August 12, 2010, Defendants filed a motion to allow supplemental expert reports after the deadline for such reports (Dkt. No. 329). Defendants requested this extension specifically so that their experts could consider documents for which this Court deemed attorney-client privileged waived in an order on June 14, 2010 (Dkt. No. 290). Defendants were obviously aware of which documents they submitted to the Court for in camera review at that time, but were unaware of which documents were turned over to plaintiff pursuant to the Court's order until July 13, 2010. Defendants' motion papers represent that their experts have since prepared reports that consider the relevant documents, and that such reports were sent to plaintiff before depositions were taken, but not before the deadline for preparation of those reports had passed. Defendants' motion papers also represent that plaintiff would not stipulate that the reports should be allowed past the deadline.

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Defendants have a substantial justification for the late disclosure of their expert reports based on the relevant documents. Defendants have made an effort to keep this case's schedule on track, by providing all supplemental reports to plaintiff by August 6, 2010, in short order after they had the documents in hand and in time for full and fair deposition questioning. Defendants' motion is GRANTED. Defendants' expert reports will not be deemed late to the extent that they were provided by August 6, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 18, 2010.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2