Estate of Jody Mack Miller Woodfox et al v. City of Oakland et al

Filing 40

ORDER RE JIMENEZ DEPOSITION AND ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge for Discovery purposes [re 38 Letter filed by Hector Jimenez, 39 Letter filed by J.W., M.W., Estate of Jody Mack Miller Woodfox, Janice Collins, J.B.P.]. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 1/20/2009. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/20/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ESTATE OF "JODY" MACK MILLER WOODFOX, JANICE COLLINS, M.W., a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem, KARINA SANDERS, J.W., a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem, AISHA NALLS, J.B.P., a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem, SHAMILIA SMART, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF OAKLAND, HECTOR JIMENEZ, individually and in his capacity as a police officer for the City of Oakland, and DOES 1­20, inclusive, Defendants. / IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

No. C 08-04148 WHA

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

ORDER RE JIMENEZ DEPOSITION AND ORDER OF REFERENCE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR DISCOVERY

When a deponent in a civil case is under criminal investigation, there is no automatic right to be excused from a deposition. The deponent may invoke his Fifth Amendment rights on a question-by-question basis. The other side may then move to compel. The Court will then balance the competing considerations and decide whether the circumstances warrant allowing the deponent to later waive and then to testify at trial. To tee this up properly in our case, Officer Jimenez should appear for his deposition as scheduled and invoke the Fifth Amendment (but only as appropriate) to various questions. Whether he would later be allowed to reverse course and to answer will have to be visited at that time. However, the Court recommends that

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

counsel postpone the Jimenez deposition until after all other officers at the scene have been deposed. This may be only a short delay but at least this accommodation is reasonable. Due to the press of one trial after the other, including a long capital prosecution to begin in February, the Court has run out of time to supervise discovery in this case and, therefore, all discovery disputes are hereby REFERRED to a magistrate judge to be appointed. Counsel are admonished to bring motions in sufficient time for the magistrate judge to rule on them and to allow time for his or her decision, as well as any necessary follow-up discovery. Put differently, please do not later ask for extensions of the trial date or summary judgment date on the ground that a discovery matter is still pending before the magistrate judge.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Dated: January 20, 2009.

WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE