Bryant et al v. Service Corporation International et al

Filing 296

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST TO COMPEL DEPOSITION(Docket No. 286) (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/2/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CLAUDE BRYANT, et al., v. Plaintiffs, No. C 08-01190 SI ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST TO COMPEL DEPOSITION (Docket No. 286) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SERVICE CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff seek an order compelling SCI to produce Jane Jones, an SCI Vice President and a named defendant, for deposition prior to June 4, 2010. Plaintiffs first sent the deposition notice on May 18. SCI offered a number of reasonable suggestions, including dividing the deposition between June 2 and 3 in order to allow plaintiffs' counsel to attend the case management conference with this Court in San Francisco on June 4; having one of plaintiffs' attorneys attend the case management conference and another attorney depose Ms. Jones on June 4; and making Ms. Jones available on June 10. Plaintiffs rejected all of these proposals, and now assert that they "need to complete their depositions prior to June 4, 2010" in order to prepare for their class certification motion. Plaintiffs' position is unreasonable. SCI offered to make Ms. Jones available prior to June 4 and alternatively on June 4 itself, but plaintiffs rejected both of these proposals. If plaintiffs wish to depose Ms. Jones prior to the date their certification motion is due, they must work with defense counsel to find a mutually agreeable date without the Court's intervention. The motion to compel is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 2, 2010 SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge

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?