Meas v. City & County of San Francisco et al

Filing 127

ORDER by Judge Hamilton denying 113 Motion for Gag Order (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/8/2010)

Meas v. City & County of San Francisco et al

Doc. 127

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, et al., Defendants. _______________________________/ Defendants' motion for a gag order against plaintiff's counsel is DENIED, based on the representation by plaintiff's counsel Benjamin Nisenbaum at the pretrial conference that he "did not . . . intend . . . to talk to the press about this case during the pendency of the trial" and "would not communicate with the media[;]" and that he "understood this promise ­ and represented as much to the Court ­ to include in its scope comments regarding any other existing case or complaint relating to Defendant Officer Serna and concerning Defendant Officer Serna generally." Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Motion at 2, 4. The court is satisfied that these representations obviate the need to consider imposing any sort of gag order (even assuming that such an order would be constitutionally permissible under the circumstances presented). JONATHAN MEAS, Plaintiff, No. C 08-4075 PJH ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR GAG ORDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

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

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 8, 2010 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

Dockets.Justia.com