Manley v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 27

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb, on 3/28/2012. IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's 21 motion is denied as moot. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KO)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
CHARLES MANLEY, JR.

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
vs.
)
)
STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________________ )

3:11-cv-00636-RCJ-WGC
MINUTES OF THE COURT
March 28, 2012

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE WILLIAM G. COBB, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEPUTY CLERK:

JENNIFER COTTER

REPORTER: NONE APPEARING

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S): NONE APPEARING
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S): NONE APPEARING
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS:
Before the court is “Plaintiff’s Motion for Court Order for Evidence/Discovery Used by the
Attorney General During Informal Settlement” (Doc. #21). Defendants have opposed plaintiff’s
motion (Doc. #23). No reply has been submitted by plaintiff and the matter is ripe for a decision.
Defendants correctly note in their opposition that a party may not seek discovery from any
source before the parties have conferred as required by Rule 26(f) unless exempted or by stipulation
or court order. (Doc. #23 at 2.) However, following defendants’ filing of an Answer (Doc. #24),
the Court issued its Scheduling Order (Doc. 25) on March 27, 2012, allowing discovery to
commence and details, among others, the deadline for completion of discovery. The parties may
now proceed with discovery.
As a caveat, however, a discovery request seeking production of “documents utilized during
a settlement conference” would be inappropriate. What went on, was discussed or referred to at a
settlement conference is confidential. On the other hand, because a party may have reviewed or
relied on certain evidence for purposes of preparing for a settlement conference (which is legitimate)
does not mean such evidence is not discoverable. Plaintiff (or any party) may seek production of any
non-privileged document which is relevant to any party’s claim or defense or reasonably calculated
to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1).
Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. #21) is therefore denied as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK

By:

/s/
Deputy Clerk