Amann v. Office of the Utah Attorney General et al

Filing 180

MEMORANDUM DECISION denying without prejudice Plaintiff's 157 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg on 10/5/21. (alf)

FILED
2021 OCT 5 AM 11:15
CLERK
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
CENTRAL DIVISION
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT
PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S SHORT
FORM MOTION TO COMPEL THE
DEPOSITION OF SEAN REYES
(DOC. NO. 157)

PAUL G. AMANN,
Plaintiff,
v.
OFFICE OF THE UTAH ATTORNEY
GENERAL; SEAN REYES; BRIDGET
ROMANO; and TYLER GREEN,

Case No. 2:18-cv-00341-JNP-DAO
Judge Jill N. Parrish

Defendants.

Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg

Before the court is Plaintiff Paul G. Amann’s Short Form Motion to Compel the
Deposition of Sean Reyes, (“Mot.,” Doc. No. 157). The court held a hearing on this motion on
September 27, 2021. (See Doc. No. 177.) For the reasons stated at the hearing and explained
below, the court DENIES the motion without prejudice.
Mr. Amann brought this action against his former employer, Defendant Office of the
Utah Attorney General (“AGO”), Attorney General Sean Reyes, and other current and former
AGO officials and employees, alleging he was retaliated against and wrongfully terminated
because of whistleblowing activities. (See generally Second Am. Compl., Doc. No. 90.) Mr.
Amann now seeks to depose Attorney General Reyes, arguing Attorney General Reyes was
involved in the investigation of Mr. Amann and the decision to terminate him. (Mot. 3, Doc. No.
157.) The AGO opposes the deposition, arguing Mr. Amann has not met his burden in showing
the deposition of this high-ranking official is warranted in this case. (Opp’n 1–3, Doc. No. 160.)
Courts limit the circumstances under which high-ranking government officials may be
deposed. See Estate of Turnbow v. Ogden City, No. 1:07-cv-114, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38001,

1

at *4 (D. Utah May 9, 2008) (unpublished). Although no uniform test exists, district courts in
this circuit have required parties seeking to depose high-ranking government officials to
“demonstrate whether (1) the official has first-hand knowledge related to the claim being
litigated[,] (2) the testimony will likely lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, (3) the
deposition is essential to the party’s case, and (4) the information cannot be obtained from an
alternative source or via less burdensome means.” White v. City & Cnty. of Denver, No. 13-cv01761, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95987, at *7 (D. Colo. July 10, 2014) (unpublished); see also
Fish v. Kobach, 320 F.R.D. 566, 579 (D. Kan. 2017) (considering similar factors); Estate of
Turnbow, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38001, at *4–5 (same).
Mr. Amann has not presented evidence sufficient to meet this test. In support of his
motion, Mr. Amann presented evidence that Attorney General Reyes had some personal
knowledge of the investigation and termination, including letters regarding Mr. Amann’s
suspension and termination which were copied to Attorney General Reyes. (Exs. 1 & 4 to Mot.,
Doc. Nos. 157-1 & 157-4.) One letter indicates AGO employee Bridget Romano recommended
to Attorney General Reyes that Mr. Amann be terminated. (Ex. 4 to Mot., Doc. No. 157-4.)
However, the AGO presented unrefuted evidence that Attorney General Reyes delegated the
investigation and termination decision to another AGO employee, Tyler Green, and was not
personally involved in these decisions. (Ex. A to Opp’n, Decl. of Bridget Romano ¶¶ 4–6 &
Exs. 1–3, Doc. No. 160-1.) Thus, information regarding the reasons for Mr. Amann’s
termination can be obtained from alternative sources, including Ms. Romano and Mr. Green.
Mr. Amann has not shown a deposition of Attorney General Reyes is essential to his case, where
he has presented no evidence of Attorney General Reyes’ direct involvement in his termination
and alternative sources of information are available.

2

If Mr. Amann obtains further information showing Attorney General Reyes’ direct
involvement in the employment decisions, this issue may be revisited, but the evidence presented
with his motion is insufficient to warrant the deposition of Attorney General Reyes at this stage.
For these reasons, Mr. Amann’s motion is DENIED without prejudice.
DATED this 5th day of October, 2021.
BY THE COURT:
_________________________________________
Daphne A. Oberg
United States Magistrate Judge

3