ESTATE OF SCOTT v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, 2:13-cv-0024-GEB-KJN. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20140630a29
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jun. 27, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 27, 2014
Summary: ORDER KENDALLI J. NEWMAN, District Judge. Presently pending before the court is plaintiffs' motion to compel further responses to interrogatories propounded on defendants Tidwell, Becker, and Xiong. (ECF No. 36.) The parties timely filed a joint statement regarding the discovery disagreement on June 19, 2014. (ECF No. 39.) At the June 26, 2014 hearing, attorney Stewart Katz appeared on behalf of plaintiffs, and attorney Jesse Rivera appeared on behalf of defendants. (ECF No. 40.) After careful
Summary: ORDER KENDALLI J. NEWMAN, District Judge. Presently pending before the court is plaintiffs' motion to compel further responses to interrogatories propounded on defendants Tidwell, Becker, and Xiong. (ECF No. 36.) The parties timely filed a joint statement regarding the discovery disagreement on June 19, 2014. (ECF No. 39.) At the June 26, 2014 hearing, attorney Stewart Katz appeared on behalf of plaintiffs, and attorney Jesse Rivera appeared on behalf of defendants. (ECF No. 40.) After carefull..
More
ORDER
KENDALLI J. NEWMAN, District Judge.
Presently pending before the court is plaintiffs' motion to compel further responses to interrogatories propounded on defendants Tidwell, Becker, and Xiong. (ECF No. 36.) The parties timely filed a joint statement regarding the discovery disagreement on June 19, 2014. (ECF No. 39.) At the June 26, 2014 hearing, attorney Stewart Katz appeared on behalf of plaintiffs, and attorney Jesse Rivera appeared on behalf of defendants. (ECF No. 40.) After carefully considering the parties' briefing and oral argument, and for the reasons discussed at the hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiffs' motion to compel (ECF No. 36) is granted in part along the terms outlined in this order.
2. Within fourteen (14) days of this order, defendants' counsel shall subpoena the cell phone records of defendants Tidwell, Becker, and Xiong for the time period January 6, 2012, to January 12, 2012, from the respective carriers.
3. Within 45 days of this order, and as necessary thereafter, defendants' counsel shall provide plaintiffs' counsel with a written update, by letter or e-mail, as to the status of the document production in response to the subpoenas.
4. Within fourteen (14) days of receipt of all such records in response to the subpoenas, defendants' counsel shall provide plaintiffs' counsel with declarations signed by defendants Tidwell, Becker, and Xiong under penalty of perjury, providing information regarding any phone calls or text messages made, sent, or received on these defendants' cell phones from January 6, 2012 to January 12, 2012, that were either (a) exchanged between these defendants OR (b) exchanged with other persons (to the extent that the communications with others pertain to the death of Mark Anthony Scott and related events). Such information shall include, if available from the subpoenaed records and defendants' knowledge, the following for each telephone call or text message: (a) the date and time of the call or text message; (b) the duration of the call; and (c) the identities of the caller/sender and receiver.
5. In light of providing the above information, defendants need not otherwise further respond to the interrogatories that are the subject of this motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
