Perry et al v. Schwarzenegger et al

Filing 289

Letter from Ethan D. Dettmer. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Dettmer, Ethan) (Filed on 12/7/2009)

Download PDF
Perry et al v. Schwarzenegger et al Doc. 289 Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document289 LAWYERS Filed12/07/09 Page1 of 2 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP A REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS __________ 555 Mission Street, Suite 3000, San Francisco, California 94105-2933 (415) 393-8200 December 7, 2009 (415) 393-8292 (415) 374-8444 The Honorable Vaughn R. Walker Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California 450 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, California 94102 Re: Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Case No. C-09-2292 VRW Fax No. Direct Dial T 36330-00001 Client Matter No. Dear Chief Judge Walker: Plaintiffs respectfully request leave to file an omnibus motion to compel to resolve various discovery disputes between Plaintiffs and Defendant-Intervenors, including DefendantIntervenors' failure to produce documents responsive to Plaintiffs' discovery requests that are clearly outside their claim of privilege, and their refusal to answer questions during depositions concerning those public documents and statements. These disputes arose just last week in connection with the depositions of several of the individual Proponents. As just one example, Plaintiffs have requested the immediate production of documents constituting public communications between the Defendant-Intervenors and discrete voter groups, such as a letter, entitled "What if We Lose," drafted by Defendant-Intervenor William Hak-Shing Tam and published on a publicly accessible website, attached hereto as Exhibit A. At the December 1, 2009 oral argument before the Ninth Circuit on Defendant-Intervenors' motion for stay, Mr. Cooper informed the panel that Dr. Tam's document "is not within my claim of privilege. Make no mistake about that . . . . it's on its face a public document." Yet Defendant-Intervenors' counsel have yet to produce that document, other similar documents introduced as exhibits at Mr. Tam's deposition, or other documents falling within that category of documents sent to discrete sub-groups of voters and potential voters. Given the pending Ninth Circuit decision on Defendant-Intervenors' motion for stay, the various discovery disputes between the parties, and the January 11 trial date, Plaintiffs respectfully submit that the most efficient manner of proceeding with the existing discovery Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document289 Filed12/07/09 Page2 of 2 The Honorable Vaughn R. Walker December 7, 2009 Page 2 disputes between the parties is that Plaintiffs promptly submit an omnibus motion to compel that the Court can then resolve in sufficient time for Plaintiffs to have all nonprivileged, responsive testimony and documents available for use at trial. Plaintiffs respectfully request the Court's leave to file such a motion. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Ethan D. Dettmer Ethan D. Dettmer Counsel for Plaintiffs cc: Counsel of Record

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?