Percelle v. Pearson et al
Filing
379
ORDER Re: Testimony of Bill Jordan, Steven Maughmer, Julienne Stenner, Jennifer Nygaard, and Custodian of Records for Santa Clara Hospital System. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 12/01/16. (tehlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/1/2016)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
Case No. 12-cv-05343-TEH
5
STEVEN DALE PERCELLE,
Plaintiff,
6
7
8
9
v.
STEVEN PEARSON, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER RE: TESTIMONY OF BILL
JORDAN, STEVEN MAUGHMER,
JULIENNE STENNER, JENNIFER
NYGAARD, AND CUSTODIAN OF
RECORDS FOR SANTA CLARA
HOSPITAL SYSTEM
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
At the November 28, 2016 pretrial conference hearing, this Court heard oral
12
argument on Defendants’ objections to a number of Plaintiff’s proposed trial witnesses. On
13
November 30, 2016, the Court received a list of questions that Plaintiff’s counsel intends
14
to ask these witnesses should he decide to call them at trial. Having carefully considered
15
the parties’ written and oral arguments, the Court overrules Defendants’ objections and
16
rules the witnesses’ testimony admissible with the exceptions listed below.
17
Bill Jordan is a CDCR-designated witness who will provide testimony on prison
18
procedures. Defendants object to his testimony as irrelevant and cumulative. Defendants’
19
objections are hereby overruled. The proposed testimony is relevant to Plaintiff’s First
20
Amendment retaliation claim, except portions concerning a plan to reduce the number of
21
inmates housed in administrative segregation.
22
Steven Maughmer is a correctional officer supervisor who played a limited role in
23
validating Plaintiff as a gang member. Defendants object to his testimony as irrelevant and
24
cumulative. Defendants’ objections are hereby overruled. The Court finds that Mr.
25
Maughmer’s proposed testimony is relevant and its probative value is not substantially
26
outweighed by a danger of presenting cumulative evidence.
27
28
Julienne Stenner is a former CDCR librarian who will testify about her knowledge
of Plaintiff as a regular library user. Defendants object to her testimony as irrelevant and
1
cumulative. Defendants’ objections are hereby overruled. The Court finds that Ms.
2
Stenner’s proposed testimony is relevant and its probative value is not substantially
3
outweighed by a danger of presenting cumulative evidence.
4
Jennifer Nygaard is an Assistant Attorney General who testify about notices to
5
CDCR and to Defendants regarding Plaintiff’s negligent medical care lawsuit. Defendants
6
object to her testimony as irrelevant and cumulative. Defendants’ objections are hereby
7
overruled. The Court finds that Ms. Stenner’s proposed testimony is relevant and its
8
probative value is not substantially outweighed by a danger of presenting cumulative
9
evidence.
10
Lastly, the Court overrules Defendants’ objection to the recently disclosed medical
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
records from Santa Clara Health and Hospital System. As stated in the October 31, 2016
12
Order on Pretrial Motions, evidence of Plaintiff’s mental health treatment received since
13
July 20, 2015 is relevant to damages. These medical records will be admitted at trial, along
14
with earlier documents that Defendants already stipulated to. A custodian of records is not
15
needed for authentication purposes and will not be allowed to testify at trial.
16
17
18
19
20
IT IS SO ORDERED.
21
22
23
Dated: 12/01/16
_____________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge
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?