Filed: Jun. 04, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 04, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF DEPOSITION IMMEDIATELY GIVEN TO PLAINTIFF AFTER RECORDINGS AND/OR ORDER DSH-C TO VIDEO RECORD HEARING FOR PLAINTIFF FRCP RULE 30 AND 30(b)(4) (ECF NO. 90) ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . Roger Walker ("Plaintiff") is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On May 31, 2019, Plaintiff filed a "motion for a true and correct copy of deposition immedia
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF DEPOSITION IMMEDIATELY GIVEN TO PLAINTIFF AFTER RECORDINGS AND/OR ORDER DSH-C TO VIDEO RECORD HEARING FOR PLAINTIFF FRCP RULE 30 AND 30(b)(4) (ECF NO. 90) ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . Roger Walker ("Plaintiff") is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On May 31, 2019, Plaintiff filed a "motion for a true and correct copy of deposition immediat..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF DEPOSITION IMMEDIATELY GIVEN TO PLAINTIFF AFTER RECORDINGS AND/OR ORDER DSH-C TO VIDEO RECORD HEARING FOR PLAINTIFF FRCP RULE 30 AND 30(b)(4)
(ECF NO. 90)
ERICA P. GROSJEAN, Magistrate Judge.
Roger Walker ("Plaintiff") is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On May 31, 2019, Plaintiff filed a "motion for a true and correct copy of deposition immediately given to Plaintiff after recordings and or order DSH-C to video record hearing for Plaintiff FRCP 30 and 30(b)(4)" ("the Motion"). (ECF No. 90). Plaintiff states that he is going to be deposed twice, once on May 31, 2019, and once on June 19, 2019. Plaintiff alleges that the "primary reason to depose this plaintiff is to alter his responses." In order to prevent this, Plaintiff requests an immediate copy of the audio and visual recording of the depositions, and/or an order directing Department of State Hospital, Coalinga, to provide Plaintiff with an audio and video recording of each deposition.
Plaintiff's motion will be denied. Plaintiff has presented no evidence for his allegation that the primary reason Defendants are deposing him is to alter his responses.
Moreover, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure already provide a mechanism for correcting errors in deposition transcripts. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(e) states:
(1) Review; Statement of Changes. On request by the deponent or a party before the deposition is completed, the deponent must be allowed 30 days after being notified by the officer that the transcript or recording is available in which:
(A) to review the transcript or recording; and
(B) if there are changes in form or substance, to sign a statement listing the changes and the reasons for making them.
(2) Changes Indicated in the Officer's Certificate. The officer must note in the certificate prescribed by Rule 30(f)(1) whether a review was requested and, if so, must attach any changes the deponent makes during the 30-day period.
The Court notes that Plaintiff may request a copy of the transcript and/or video recording from the officer recording and/or transcribing the deposition for a fee. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(f)(3) ("When paid reasonable charges, the officer must furnish a copy of the transcript or recording to any party or the deponent").
Accordingly, based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
