Ogala et al v. Chevron Corporation et al

Filing 175

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING PLAINTIFF TO COMPLY WITH DISCOVERY REQUESTS 153 . (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 8/26/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12

Natto Iyela Gbarabe,

13

Plaintiffs,

14

v.

15

Chevron Corporation,

16

Case No. 14-cv-00173-SI
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR AN
ORDER COMPELLING PLAINTIFF
TO COMPLY WITH DISCOVERY
REQUESTS

Defendant.

17
18

Defendant Chevron Corporation’s Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff to Comply

19

with Discovery Requests was regularly heard and duly considered by this Court. Based on the

20

papers filed in support of and opposition to the motion, and oral argument thereon,

21

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

22

Defendant’s motion is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff shall produce unredacted versions

23

of the e-mails filed as exhibits to the Declaration of Neil Fraser (ECF No. 81); any other not

24

privileged and responsive communications with the former plaintiffs, referring attorneys and their

25

representatives and agents; and any not privileged communications concerning the abandonment

26

of the five former plaintiffs and narrowing of the putative class. With regard to responsive

27

documents that plaintiff asserts are privileged, plaintiff shall provide a privilege log. In addition,

28

with regard to the 74 communications previously identified by plaintiff as responsive but
[PROP.] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S
MOT. TO COMPEL
CASE NO. 14-CV-00173-SI

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

withheld on the ground of privilege, plaintiff shall provide a privilege log. The Court makes no
finding on the current record whether plaintiff has waived any privileges.
Plaintiff shall provide complete, verified responses to defendant’s interrogatories stating
(a) the basis on which his counsel alleged in the original complaint and first and second amended
complaints that the accident had caused statewide impact and damaged the five former plaintiffs,
including any not privileged communications relating to those allegations; (b) how and when
plaintiff and his counsel discovered that the damages allegations were incorrect and that Schedule
A was altered and included non-existent putative claimants; (c) whether plaintiff’s counsel ever
reviewed or had access to the documents on which Schedule A is based; and (d) the
circumstances surrounding the pretermission of the five former plaintiffs and their communities,
including the former lead plaintiff’s desire to bring on other lawyers and the imposition of an
£825,000 exit fee.
Plaintiffs shall produce the documents and provide the privilege log and interrogatory
responses no later than September 9, 2016.

If the materials or information produced in

accordance with this order make supplemental class certification briefing necessary, defendant
may seek appropriate leave to file such supplementation.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20

Dated: August 26, 2016
By:

21
22

HONORABLE SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Court Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROP.] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S
MOT. TO COMPEL
CASE NO. 14-CV-00173-SI