Hamid Amiri v. Glenn W Groff et al

Filing 67

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL IN PART. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 8/21/2017. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/21/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

HAMID AMIRI,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No.15-cv-03994-JSC
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
COMPEL IN PART

v.
BAY HARBOUR CARE HOME, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 66

Defendants.

12
13

Now pending before the Court is the parties’ joint discovery letter brief regarding

14

Plaintiff’s deposition. (Dkt. No. 66.) Defendants took Plaintiff’s deposition for more than seven

15

hours on February 1, 2016. Defendants’ counsel unilaterally stopped questioning Plaintiff stating

16

that she wanted to meet and confer about additional time. She also stated that she had about two

17

or three hours more of questioning. (Dkt. No. 66-1 at 3.) Plaintiff expressed a desire to finish the

18

deposition that day and Plaintiff’s counsel did not agree to make his client available for further

19

deposition. (Id.) Discovery closed in January 2017 without Defendants attempting to complete

20

Plaintiff’s deposition. They now seek to do so.

21

As Plaintiff is the primary witness in this significant case a deposition of more than seven

22

hours is warranted. The Court also understands why Defendants’ counsel would have wanted to

23

stop the deposition at 5:30 p.m. as attorneys also have lives outside of their jobs. Counsel,

24

however, should have made arrangements for a second deposition in advance of the first and at a

25

minimum should have attempted to continue the deposition before the close of fact discovery.

26

Nevertheless, given the significant amount of money at stake in this lawsuit, Defendants may take

27

Plaintiff’s deposition for an additional 2.5 hours, the amount of time counsel stated she needed to

28

complete her questioning. The deposition should be scheduled at a time and location that is

1

convenient to Plaintiff.

2

This Order disposes of Docket No. 66.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4

Dated: August 21, 2017

5
6
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
United States Magistrate Judge

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