Polk v. Cavin et al

Filing 224

ORDER FOR RETURN OF DOCUMENT TO PUBLIC DEFENDER re 174 Objection and Request for Sanctions Against the CCC Public Defender filed by Susan Mae Polk. Request for sanctions is DENIED. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 11/27/12. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/27/2012) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/27/2012: # 2 Certificate/Proof of Service) (klhS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 SUSAN MAE POLK, Plaintiff, 7 8 9 10 v. Case No.: 3:08-cv-01483-MMC (JCS) ORDER FOR RETURN OF DOCUMENT TO PUBLIC DEFENDER [Docket No.174] DEPUTY JAMIS CAVIN, et al., Defendant. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 Plaintiff filed an Objection and Request for Sanctions against the Contra Costa County 14 Public Defender [docket no.174]. The Court ordered further briefing, and both the Defendants 15 and Plaintiff filed additional pleadings regarding the matter. 16 The course of events giving rise to this motion are clear. Plaintiff sought memoranda 17 regarding the incident that lies at the center of this litigation. After a motion to compel was filed, 18 the County Counsel and the Public Defender asserted that a memo prepared by Deputy Public 19 Defender Laurie Mont was protected by the attorney work product doctrine. The Court disagreed 20 and ordered the document turned over to Plaintiff. County Counsel’s office, on behalf of the 21 Public Defender, gave a copy of the memo to plaintiff, and kept one copy in the Counsel’s office. 22 Counsel and the Public Defender have admitted in their papers that the memo is work 23 product, and this Court determined that, as Plaintiff was the client involved, Plaintiff was entitled 24 to see the work product. However, nothing in this Court’s orders gave the Public Defender the 25 right to turn the document at issue over to the Counsel’s office (who represents defendants in this 26 matter). The Counsel’s office is adverse to Plaintiff, and is not entitled to see work product 27 prepared for the Plaintiff unless the standard established by Rule 26(b)(3). No such showing has 28 been made. Accordingly, counsel for Defendants is ORDERED to return all copies of Ms. 1 2 Mo ont’s memora ancume of th heAugust 29 2003 appp 9, pearence to t Public Defender’s Of the ffice. The req quest for sanc ctions is DE ENIED. 3 4 Dat ted: Novemb 27, 2012 ber 2 5 ___ __________ ___________ ________ Jos seph C. Sper ro Un nited States M Magistrate Ju udge 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?