Helget v. Hays, Kansas, City of et al

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 5 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kenneth G. Gale on 7/31/2013. (df)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
FIRMA HELGET,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF HAYS, KANSAS, TOBY DOUGHERTY,
and DONALD SCHEIBLER

)
)
)
)
) Case No. 13-CV-2228 KHV/KGG
)
)
)

PROTECTIVE ORDER
NOW on this 31st day of July, 2013, the above-captioned matter comes on for consideration by
the Court. The parties have jointly requested a Protective Order due to the nature of the allegations
contained in Plaintiffs Complaint. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants improperly terminated her from her
position with the City of Hays, Kansas ("City") due to Plaintiff providing an affidavit in a separate
lawsuit brought against the City. The City alleges Plaintiff was terminated as a result of her acts in
providing confidential information to individuals outside of the police department as well as improper
use of her work computer and other employment issues. One of several issues arising in discovery will
be Plaintiffs use of the internet at work and her personnel file regarding employment issues she had
while with the City. Further, it is likely that issues surrounding other individuals use of the internet at
work may be raised and inquiries pertaining to these issues require the parties to discover and/or produce
information, documents and things (which may include electronically created or stored information) that
consist of personnel files of parties and nonparties, financial information, disciplinary investigations of
the City, the internal reviews of the City and internal policies and procedures that are exempted from
disclosure pursuant to the Kansas Open Records Act, K.S.A. § 45-221.

(00307383)
{Protective Order}

Accordingly, the Court finds that it may be necessary for the parties to produce relevant
information, documents and things pertaining to parties and non-parties considered to be confidential.
Therefore, this Court finds good cause exists for the entry of this Order.
IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1.

The Protective order shall govern documents of a confidential nature. All such documents
produced by a party are governed by and subject to this Protective Order, and shall be stamped
"Confidential."

2.

Any deposition testimony, interrogatory or filing by a party or witness in this action, may be
considered confidential for the purposes of this Order if the testimony or filing relates to the
information contained in the document and things marked "Confidential." In the context of a
deposition, testimony may be designated as confidential by indicating on the record at the time
of the deposition that such testimony is confidential and subject to this Protective Order. Within
seven (7) days following the completion and delivery of the transcript of any deposition, a party
may also designate testimony as confidential by identifying by page and line the information it
considers to be confidential and subject to this Protective Order. The parties reserve the right to
obtain a Protective Order from the Court maintaining the confidentiality of the information at
the time of trial.

3.

Except as provided for herein, testimony and documents designated as confidential shall be
disclosed only to the parties, their counsel of record, their paralegals and clerical personnel, and
to persons retained by counsel or the parties as experts. Counsel may mark confidential
documents as deposition exhibits and show them to witnesses in depositions for the purpose of
authenticating the document, obtaining an explanation of the document or impeaching a witness

{00307383}
{Protective Order}

who testifies contrary to the document. Counsel shall not otherwise permit disclosure of any
confidential information or documents or any portion or summary thereof.
4.

Documents or testimony designated as confidential and produced or provided in this litigation
may be used only for the purposes of this litigation. Except as provided herein, no person having
access to documents or testimony designated as subject to this Protective Order or the
information therein shall make public disclosure of those documents or testimony or that
information without further Order of the Court or stipulation of the parties.

5.

If any party objects to another party's designation of a document as "Confidential," the objecting
party shall provide written notification of the challenge to the disclosing party within 30 days of
the production of the challenged document. The parties shall thereafter work together to agree on
whether the challenged documents are truly confidential. If no agreement is reached, the
disclosing party shall have 14 days from the written notification to file a Motion seeking the
protections afforded by this Order and the moving party shall bear the burden of proving that the
challenged documents are entitled to the protections afforded by this Order. Pending a ruling
upon the Motion, the parties agree to treat the challenged documents as Confidential and subject
to the provisions of this Order. If no Motion is filed within 14 days, the challenged documents
will lose their confidential protection and will no longer be subject to the terms of this Order.

6.

All documents designated as subject to this Protective Order and all copies thereof must be
returned to opposing counsel within 30 days after the termination of this litigation, including
any appeal, or shall be certified to counsel as having been destroyed, except as necessary to
comply with the ethical requirements to maintain a lawyer's file.

7.

Nothing in this Protective Order affects the right of counsel to discuss with a party any relevant
information contained in documents or testimony designated as subject to this Protective Order.

{00307383}
{Protective Order}

8.

Binding Effect of This Order. This Order is binding upon the parties, agents and employees of
the parties, counsel for the parties and agents and employees of counsel for the parties.

9.

Any party seeking to file under seal a motion or other pleading containing confidential
information, must first file a motion with the Court and be granted leave to file the particular
document under seal pursuant to D. Kan. R. 5.4.6.

10.

This Protective Order does not constitute a ruling on the question of whether any particular
document is properly discoverable and does not constitute any ruling on any potential objection
to the discoverability of any document.

11.

Prior to trial, the parties shall meet and confer concerning the extension of this Protective Order
and its application to the use of confidential information at the time of trial. If necessary, the
Court will review such confidential information in camera and make a determination by separate
order after briefing by the parties regarding the disputed information.

12.

Upon termination of this action by final disposition, the parties may seek leave to reopen the
case solely to enforce the provisions of this Protective Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ KENNETH G. GALE
THE HONORABLE KENNETH G. GALE
United States Magistrate Judge

{00307383}
{Protective Order}

Respectfully submitted,
FISHER, PATTERSON, SAYLER & SMITH, LLP

/s/ Peter Maharry
Jill Waldman, [e-mail] #19634
Peter Maharry, [e-mail] #19364
51 Corporate Woods, Ste.
300 9393 W. 110th Street
Overland Park, Kansas 66210
[phone]/Fax:[phone]
ATTORNEYSFORDEFENDANTS

/s/ Christopher J. Stucky
Christopher J. Stucky, #19378
Eric S. Playter, #23027
DUNN & DAVISON
1100 Walnut Street, Ste. 2900
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
[phone] / Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

and
Steve A.J. Bukaty
Donald R. Aubry
Joseph M. McGreevy
STEVE A.J. BUKATY, CHARTERED
8826 Santa Fe Drive, Ste. 218
Overland Park, Kansas 66212
[phone] / Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

{00307383}

{Protective Order}