DOE v. STATE, 4:09CV3266 (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20120604745
Visitors: 2
Filed: Jun. 01, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 01, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RICHARD G. KOPF, Senior District Judge. On May 14, 2012, Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart entered a memorandum and order (filing 447 in Case No. 8:09CV456) in which she determined that certain documents listed in Defendants' privilege log ( i.e. , Document Nos. 1a, 1b, 2, and 3 of Exhibit C) are protected by the deliberative process privilege and are not subject to discovery by Plaintiffs, but that the remaining documents are not privileged and must be produced by Defend
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RICHARD G. KOPF, Senior District Judge. On May 14, 2012, Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart entered a memorandum and order (filing 447 in Case No. 8:09CV456) in which she determined that certain documents listed in Defendants' privilege log ( i.e. , Document Nos. 1a, 1b, 2, and 3 of Exhibit C) are protected by the deliberative process privilege and are not subject to discovery by Plaintiffs, but that the remaining documents are not privileged and must be produced by Defenda..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
RICHARD G. KOPF, Senior District Judge.
On May 14, 2012, Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart entered a memorandum and order (filing 447 in Case No. 8:09CV456) in which she determined that certain documents listed in Defendants' privilege log (i.e., Document Nos. 1a, 1b, 2, and 3 of Exhibit C) are protected by the deliberative process privilege and are not subject to discovery by Plaintiffs, but that the remaining documents are not privileged and must be produced by Defendants.1 On May 23, 2012, Defendants filed a statement of objections (filing 448 in Case No. 8:09CV456).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), I have reviewed the portions of the memorandum and order to which objections have been made, and find that the objections should be denied for the reason that the Magistrate Judge's findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous or contrary to law.2 Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that:
(1) the Magistrate Judge's memorandum and order (filing 447 in Case No. 8:09CV456) shall not be disturbed and is hereby sustained;
(2) Defendants' statement of objections to the aforesaid memorandum and order (filing in 448 Case No. 8:09CV456) is denied; and
(3) the stay of the Magistrate Judge's order is lifted and Defendants shall produce all non-privileged documents on or before June 15, 2012.
FootNotes
1. The order directed Defendants to produce the documents by May 25, 2012. Magistrate Judge Zwart subsequently stayed the order pending the disposition of Defendants' statement of objections.
2. To the extent the appropriate standard of review is de novo, I have conducted a de novo review.
Source: Leagle
