Estate of Delion Johnson v. County of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California·Decided November 17, 2023·No. 2:23-cv-01304·Unknown

Opinion

1||IPORTER SCOTT 9 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Carl L. Fessenden, SBN 161494 3 cfessenden @porterscott.com Suli A. Mastorakos, SBN 330383 4 || smastorakos @porterscott.com Katie Bonin, SBN 343726 5 kbonin @porterscott.com 2180 Harvard Street, Suite 500 6 Sacramento, California 95815 7 TEL: 916.929.1481 FAX: 916.927.3706 8 Attorneys for Defendants 9 || COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT and JIM COOPER 10 Exempt from Filing Fees Pursuant to Government Code § 6103 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT B EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 || ESTATE OF DELION JOHNSON, D.J., CASE NO. 2:23-CV-01304-KJM-JDP M.J., AND MICHELLE COOPER, 15 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER; 16 Plaintiff, FPROPOSED} ORDER 17 V. 8 Complaint Filed: 7/5/23

19 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF’S 20 || DEPARTMENT, JIM COOPER AND DOE 1 to 20, 21 2 Defendants. 23 24 25 26 27 28

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER; PROPOSED} ORDER

1 STIPULATION 2 A. PURPOSE AND LIMITATION 3 Defendants believe that the disclosure and discovery activity concerning the materials described 4 in this stipulated protective order is likely to involve production of information for which protection 5 from public disclosure would be warranted. Plaintiffs have not been permitted to view the materials 6 described in this stipulated protective order. The parties acknowledge that this protective order does not 7 confer blanket protections on all disclosures or discovery activity, and that the protection it affords 8 extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to such protection under Federal Rule 9 of Civil Procedure 26(c). The parties further acknowledge that this stipulated protective order does not 10 entitle any party to file information designated as protected or confidential under seal, where Local Rule 11 141 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and reflects the standards that will be applied when a 12 party seeks permission from the Court to file material under seal. 13 B. DEFINITIONS 14 The following definitions shall apply to this Protective Order: 15 1. The “Action” shall mean and refer to the above-captioned matter and to all actions now 16 or later consolidated with the Action, and any appeal from the Action and from any other action 17 consolidated at any time under the above-captioned matter, through final judgment. 18 2. “Documents” or “Confidential Documents” shall mean the documents that Defendants 19 designate as “Confidential” and described in section C. 20 3. “Confidential” shall mean information designated “Confidential” pursuant to this 21 stipulated protective order. Information designated “Confidential” shall be information that is 22 determined in good faith by the attorneys representing the designating party to be subject to protection 23 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). Confidential documents, material, and/or information 24 shall be used solely for purposes of litigation. Confidential information shall not be used by the non- 25 designating party for any business or other purpose, unless agreed to in writing by all parties to this 26 action or as authorized by further order of the Court. 27 4. “Defendants” shall mean the COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO 28 COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, JIM COOPER, and any other Defendants that may 1 subsequently be added to this action (for example, “DOE 1 to 20”). 2 5. “Plaintiffs” shall mean the ESTATE OF DELION JOHNSON, D.J., M.J., and 3 MICHELLE COOPER. 4 6. “Parties” shall mean Plaintiffs and Defendants, identified above. 5 C. INFORMATION COVERED 6 Covered Information: 7 Pursuant to Local Rule 141.1(c)(1), a description of the information eligible for protection under 8 this stipulated protective order is limited to the following: 9 1. Medical Records of Delion Johnson 10 2. Mental Health/Psychiatric Records of Delion Johnson 11 Particularized Need for Protection: 12 Pursuant to Local Rule141.1(c)(2), Defendants assert that there exists a specific, particularized 13 need for protection as to the information covered by this stipulated protective order. Defendants 14 represent to the Court and Plaintiffs that the materials designated to be covered by this stipulated 15 protective order are limited solely to those which would qualify for protection under Federal Rule of 16 Civil Procedure 26(c), and does not include information designated on a blanket or indiscriminate basis. 17 See, e.g., In Re Roman Catholic Archbishop of Portland, 661 F.3d 417, 424 (9th Cir. 2011). 18 Showing of Need for a Protective Order: 19 Pursuant to Local Rule 141.1(c)(3), protection afforded by this stipulated protective order is for 20 the convenience of Defendants and the Court. Defendants seek to avoid litigation and expenditure of 21 resources concerning a potential motion for protective order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 22 26(c). The entry of this stipulated protective order may prevent the parties and the Court from 23 conducting the usual document-by-document analysis necessary to obtain protection, in favor of a 24 procedure whereby presumptive protection is afforded based on Defendants’ good faith representations 25 of the need for protection. See, e.g., Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., 785 F.2d 1108, 1122 (3d Cir. 26 1986) (“[T]he burden of justifying the confidentiality of each and every document sought to be covered 27 by a protective order remains on the party seeking the protective order; any other conclusion would turn 28 Rule 26(c) on its head.”). As a result, production may be made with this stipulated protective order in 1 place and, if necessary, it will permit discrete and narrowed challenges to documents designated for 2 protection. 3 D. TERMS OF THE PROTECTIVE ORDER 4 Confidential Documents subject to protection may be designated as “Confidential” and produced 5 subject to this stipulated protective order: 6 1. The Confidential documents shall be used solely in connection with the above-captioned 7 civil case, and in the preparation and trial of the case. The parties do not waive any objections to the 8 admissibility of the documents or portions thereof in future proceedings in this case, including trial. 9 2. The parties will designate the Confidential documents as confidential by affixing a mark 10 labelling them “Confidential.” 11 3. The Confidential documents may only be disclosed to the following persons: 12 a. Plaintiffs, Mark E. Merin and Paul H. Masuhara of the Law Office of Mark E. 13 Merin, and any partners and associates in that office; 14 b. Defendants, Carl L. Fessenden and Suli A. Mastorakos of Porter Scott, and any 15 partners and associates in that office; 16 c. Paralegal, clerical, and secretarial personnel or support staff regularly employed 17 by counsel referred to in subparts (a) and (b) immediately above, including stenographic deposition 18 reporters or videographers retained in connection with this action; 19 d. Court personnel, including stenographic reporters or videographers engaged in 20 proceedings as are necessarily incidental to the preparation for the trial in the civil action; 21 e. Any expert, consultant, or investigator retained in connection with this action; 22 however, such persons must be advised of and abide by this protective order; 23 f. The finder of facts at the time of trial, subject to the court’s rulings on in limine 24 motions and objections of counsel; and 25 g. Witnesses during their depositions in this action.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Estate of Delion Johnson v. County of Sacramento, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Estate of Delion Johnson v. County of Sacramento (Estate of Delion Johnson v. County of Sacramento) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Roman Catholic Archbishop of Portland in Or.
661 F.3d 417 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.
785 F.2d 1108 (Third Circuit, 1986)