Magee v. County of Tuolumne

District Court, E.D. California·Decided March 12, 2021·No. 1:19-cv-01522·Unknown

Opinion

1 XAVIER BECERRA, State Bar No. 118517 LYNN A. GARCIA, State Bar No. 131196 Attorney General of California Spinelli, Donald, & Nott 2 WILLIAM C. KWONG, State Bar No. 168010 601 University Avenue, Suite 225 Supervising Deputy Attorney General Sacramento, CA 95825 3 JEFFREY T. FISHER, State Bar No. 303712 Telephone: (916) 448-7888 LUCIA Q. LI., State Bar No. 309355 Fax: (916) 448-6888 4 Deputy Attorney General E-mail: LynnG@sdnlaw.com 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 Attorneys for Defendant County of Tuolumne 5 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 Telephone: (415) 510-3568 6 Fax: (415) 703-5843 Email: Jeffrey.Fisher@doj.ca.gov 7 Attorneys for Defendant D. Jordan-Curasi

8 BRIAN T. DUNN, State Bar No. 176502 ERIC DANIEL FARRAR, State Bar No. 155217 The Cochran Firm California Attorney at Law 9 4929 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1010 600 East Main Suite 100 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Turlock, CA 95380 10 Telephone: (323) 435-8205 Telephone: (209) 634-5500 Fax: (323) 282-5280 Fax: (209) 634-5556 11 E-mail: BDunn@cochranefirm.com E-mail: Danlaw1@msn.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Magee and Shaw Attorney for Defendant County of Stanislaus 12

13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 FRESNO DIVISION 16 17 18 HOPE MAGEE, et al., 1:19-cv-01522-AWI-BAM 19 Plaintiff, STIPULATED PRETRIAL PROTECTIVE ORDER 20 v.

21 Judge: Hon. Anthony W. Ishii COUNTY OF TUOLUMNE, et al., Trial Date: November 16, 2021 22 Action Filed: October 28, 2019 Defendants. 23

24 25 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 26 Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of confidential, 27 proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for 28 any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby 1 stipulate to and petition the court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties 2 acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to 3 discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited 4 information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. The 5 parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 12.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does 6 not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Civil Local Rule 141 and the court’s standing 7 orders set forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party 8 seeks permission from the court to file material under seal. 9 10 2. DEFINITIONS 11 2.1 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party to the litigation that challenges the designation of 12 information or items under this Order. 13 2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is generated, 14 stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 26(c). 16 2.3 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well as 17 their support staff). 18 2.4 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items that it 19 produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY 20 CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”. 21 2.5 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or 22 manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, 23 transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in 24 this matter. 25 2.6 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to the 26 litigation who (1) has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a 27 consultant in this action, (2) is not a past or current employee of a Party or of a Party’s competitor, and 28 (3) at the time of retention, is not anticipated to become an employee of a Party or of a Party’s competitor. 1 2.7 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” Information or Items: 2 extremely sensitive “Confidential Information or Items,” disclosure of which to another Party or Non- 3 Party would create a substantial risk of serious harm that could not be avoided by less restrictive means. 4 2.8 House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a party to this action. House Counsel 5 does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 6 2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity 7 not named as a Party to this action. 8 2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a party to this action but 9 are retained to represent or advise a party to this action and have appeared in this action on behalf of that 10 party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party. 11 2.11 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, 12 consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 13 2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in 14 this action. 15 2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., 16 photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or 17 retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. 18 2.14 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as 19 “CONFIDENTIAL,” or as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” 20 2.15 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing 21 Party. 22 2.16 Related Case: a civil case that the court has related to this litigation under Eastern District 23 Local Rule 123 and the undersigned plaintiff’s counsel represents the plaintiff. 24 25 3. SCOPE The protections conferred by this Stipulation and Order cover not only Protected Material (as 26 defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies, 27 excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any testimony, conversations, or 28 1 presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material. However, the protections 2 conferred by this Stipulation and Order do not cover the following information: (a) any information that is 3 in the public domain at the time of disclosure to a Receiving Party or becomes part of the public domain 4 after its disclosure to a Receiving Party as a result of publication not involving a violation of this Order, 5 including becoming part of the public record through trial or otherwise; and (b) any information known to 6 the Receiving Party prior to the disclosure or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure from a 7 source who obtained the information lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to the Designating 8 Party. Any use of Protected Material at trial shall be governed by a separate agreement or order. 9 10 4. DURATION 11 Even after final disposition of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by this Order 12 shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a court order otherwise 13 directs. Final disposition shall be deemed to be the later of (1) dismissal of all claims and defenses in this 14 action, with or without prejudice; and (2) final judgment herein after the completion and exhaustion of all 15 appeals, rehearings, remands, trials, or reviews of this action, including the time limits for filing any 16 motions or applications for extension of time pursuant to applicable law. 17 18 5.

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

Magee v. County of Tuolumne, (E.D. Cal. 2021).

Magee v. County of Tuolumne (Magee v. County of Tuolumne) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N
605 F.3d 665 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)