H. et al v. Clark County et al

Filing 61

ORDER re ECF No. 60 Motion to Compel: Responses due by 7/23/2018. Replies due by 7/25/2018. Motion Hearing set for 7/26/2018 at 9:00 AM in LV Courtroom 3B before Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 7/19/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

S.H. JOHN DOE, et al.,

8
9
10
11
12
13

v.

Case No. 2:17-cv-2380-MMD-PAL
Plaintiffs,

ORDER
(Mot Compel – ECF No. 60)

COUNTY OF CLARK, et al.,
Defendants.

Before the court is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Las Vegas Metropolitan Police
Department’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Subpoena (ECF No. 60) filed July 9, 2018.

14

This is an action brought by the legal guardians of a minor child under the Federal Adoption

15

Assistance Act and Child Welfare Act alleging thirteen claims for violation of plaintiffs’

16

substantive due process rights. The complaint alleges the minor plaintiff was placed in a group

17

home used exclusively for juvenile sex offenders. At the time he was placed in the group home,

18

he was only ten years old. While he was in the group home, an older “high risk” thirteen-year-old

19

juvenile was assigned to the same bedroom where the plaintiff John Doe was living. The complaint

20

alleges that on February 14, 2017, the older juvenile forced the plaintiff John Doe into the closet

21

of the shared bedroom and forcibly sodomized him.

22

Plaintiffs served a notice of deposition of the custodian of records for the Las Vegas

23

Metropolitan Police Department on all parties in this case requesting LVMPD to produce “all

24

police reports, records, photos, recordings, statements, or other documents pertaining to the

25

incident that occurred on or about February 14, 2017.”

26

LVMPD was served with the subpoena duces tecum on February 9, 2018. On February

27

21, 2018, LVMPD served an objection to the subpoena asserting that the documents were

28

confidential because they involved an open criminal case. On June 7, 2018, counsel for plaintiff
1

1

conducted a telephonic meet-and-confer with Charlotte Bible, general counsel for LVMPD who

2

stated that since the requested documents pertained to a criminal matter involving a juvenile, the

3

information could not be released. A follow up meet-and-confer occurred on June 13, 2018, to

4

discuss the subpoena. Ms. Bible confirmed that the criminal case was closed, but advised that an

5

order from the court would be required since the material requested involved a juvenile. Ms. Bible

6

also requested that the documents be subject to a protective order. Plaintiffs do not object to the

7

documents being produced subject to a protective order, but request an order from the court

8

compelling LVMPD to produce documents responsive to the subpoena duces tecum. A proposed

9

form of protective order is attached as Exhibit “6” to the motion.

10

Having reviewed and considered the matter,

11

IT IS ORDERED that:

12

1. Defendants shall have until July 23, 2018, to file a response to the motion.

13

2. Non-Party LVMPD shall have until July 23, 2018, to file a response to the motion.

14

3. Plaintiffs shall have until July 25, 2018 to file a reply.

15

4. A hearing on the motion is set for 9:00 a.m., July 26, 2018, in Courtroom 3B.

16

DATED this 19th day of July, 2018.

17
18
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2