K. v. Sonoma County

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISION 7 8 MICHELLE K., et al., Case No. 22-cv-01202-AMO (RMI)

9 Plaintiffs, ORDER ON JOINT LETTER BRIEF 10 v. Re: Dkt. No. 338 11 COUNTY OF SONOMA, et al., 12 Defendants.

13 14 Before the court is a joint letter brief filed “concerning the deposition of Dr. Virginia 15 Crossleysmith and whether the psychotherapist-patient privilege protects [Defendant] Gina 16 Centeno’s communications with Dr. Crossleysmith.” (Dkt. 338, p. 1). The court finds the matter 17 suitable for disposition without a hearing pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78(b) and 18 Civil Local Rule 7-1(b). 19 Defendants seek to take the deposition of Dr. Crossleysmith, but Dr. Crossleysmith is 20 concerned that sitting for a deposition may violate her obligations under California’s 21 psychotherapist-patient confidentiality requirements and subject her to prosecution. The court 22 finds that the deposition should go forward on two bases. First, Gina Centeno waived the 23 psychotherapist-patient privilege when she gave a letter of support authored by Dr. Crossleysmith 24 to third parties. See id. at 7–8. That letter details facts and circumstances surrounding Gina 25 Centeno’s care of foster children, her mental status, her emotional status, the fact that she was 26 seeking therapy related to her foster children, diagnoses, and other topics. Id. By submitting this 27 letter to investigating agencies and personnel, Gina Centeno waived the psychotherapist-patient 1 the patient may of course waive the protection.”’). 2 Second, the psychotherapist-patient privilege does not apply when the communication is 3 made in furtherance of a crime, fraud, or tort. See United States v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 563 4 (1989). As stated, the letter was submitted in support of Gina Centeno to government agencies 5 || which were investigating her for abuse of foster children in her care. Gina Centeno has since been 6 || convicted of harassing and abusing those children and is now incarcerated. See Dkt. 1, p. 3. 7 Because the communications with Dr. Crossleysmith were made in furtherance of these crimes, 8 || the court finds that the privilege does not apply. 9 Accordingly, the court finds that the psychotherapist-patient privilege between Gina 10 || Centeno and Dr. Crossleysmith has been waived and, in any case, does not apply because the 11 communications were made in furtherance of a crime. Dr. Crossleysmith is hereby ORDERED to 12 appear for her deposition. 5 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. || Dated: May 27, 2025 3 15 Hh] 16 / ROBERT M. ILLMAN 17 United States Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28