Upton v. County of El Dorado

District Court, E.D. California·Decided October 28, 2020·No. 2:19-cv-01972·Unknown

Opinion

BRUCE A. KILDAY, ESQ., SB No. 066415 Email: bkilday@akk-law.com GÖKALP Y. GÜRER, ESQ., SB No. 311919 Email: ggurer@akk-law.com GARRETT E. SEUELL, ESQ., SB No. 323175 Email: gseuell@akk-law.com ANGELO, KILDAY & KILDUFF, LLP Attorneys at Law 601 University Avenue, Suite 150 Sacramento, CA 95825 Telephone: (916) 564-6100 Telecopier: (916) 564-6263

Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF EL DORADO, EL DORADO COUNTY DEPUTY JACK KERRUISH, and EL DORADO COUNTY DEPUTY EVAN RICHARDSON

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JENNIFER UPTON, an individual, ) No.: 2:19-cv-1972 JAM DB ) Plaintiff, ) CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT ) AND STIPULATED PROTECTIVE vs. ) ORDER ) COUNTY OF EL DORADO, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) )

-1- IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff JENNIFER ANN UPTON (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants COUNTY OF EL DORADO, EL DORADO COUNTY DEPUTY JACK KERRUISH, and EL DORADO COUNTY DEPUTY EVAN RICHARDSON (collectively, the “Defendants”) (together, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel of record, that in order to facilitate the exchange of information and documents which may be subject to confidentiality, and in order to protect the fundamental right to privacy of Defendants and third-parties, the Parties hereby enter into this Confidentiality Agreement and Stipulated Protective Order (the “Protective Order”) pursuant to and enforceable under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS Disclosure and discovery in this litigation could potentially involve production of confidential and private information not otherwise made public as a matter of law, for which special protection from public disclosure and for use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation would be warranted. Accordingly, the Parties stipulate to the following Protective Order regarding production of confidential and private records. 2. DISCOVERY MATERIAL SUBJECT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER Either Party, when producing any discovery material to the other Party, may decide what material to designate as subject to the Protective Order and shall have them marked as described below. Any discovery material designated “confidential” must be BATES-stamped and marked “CONFIDENTIAL.” Further, in depositions or other proceedings, a Party seeking to designate testimony as confidential shall invoke this right on the record, and shall have fourteen (14) days from receiving the final transcript to designate some or all of the transcript “confidential” as described above. 3. SCOPE The protections conferred by this Protective Order cover not only the produced discovery material, but also any information copied or extracted therefrom, as well as all copies, excerpts, summaries, or compilations thereof, plus testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties or counsel to or in court or in other settings that might reveal confidential discovery material. //

-2- 4. DURATION Even after the termination of this litigation, the confidentiality obligations imposed by this Protective Order shall remain in effect until the designating Party agrees otherwise in writing or a Court orders otherwise. Unless otherwise ordered or agreed in writing by the designating Party, within sixty (60) days after the final termination of this action, defined as the dismissal or entry of judgment by the district court, or if an appeal is filed, the disposition of the appeal, each receiving Party must return all confidential material to the designating Party. This includes all copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries, or any other form of reproducing or capturing any of the confidential material. With permission in writing from the designating Party, the receiving Party may destroy some or all of the confidential material instead of returning it. Notwithstanding this provision, counsel are entitled to retain an archival copy of all pleadings, motion papers, transcripts, legal memoranda, correspondence, or attorney work product, even if such materials contain confidential material. Any such archival copies that contain or constitute confidential material remain subject to this Protective Order. 5. INADVERTENT FAILURE TO DESIGNATE An inadvertent failure to designate qualified information or items as “confidential” does not, standing alone, waive the designating Party’s right to secure protection under this Protective Order for such material. If the designating Party notifies the receiving Party of the inadvertent failure to designate and corrective designation within twenty-one (21) days from production, the receiving Party must make reasonable and good faith efforts to ensure that the material is treated in accordance with this Protective Order. 6. CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS If a Party seeks to challenge a confidentiality designation, that Party shall first engage in a good faith meet and confer with the designating Party, and if a resolution cannot be reached, that Party may seek judicial intervention. The burden of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding shall be on the designating Party. Until the Court rules on the challenge, the Parties shall continue to afford the material in question the level of protection to which it is entitled under the designating Party’s designation.

-3- 7. DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL DISCOVERY MATERIAL The receiving Party agrees to control confidential material that it has received, and agrees not to upload or post any confidential material to any online website and not to disclose any confidential material to any organizations, news or otherwise. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court or permitted in writing by the designating Party, a receiving Party may disclose any information or item designated “confidential” only to: (a) the receiving Party’s counsel of record in this litigation, as well as employees of the Party’s counsel to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the information for this litigation; (b) the officers, directors, and employees of the receiving Party to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation; (c) Retained experts of the receiving Party to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation and who have signed the “Agreement to be Bound by Protective Order”, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference; (d) the Court and its personnel; (e) court reporters, their staff, and professional vendors to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation and who have signed the “Agreement to be Bound by Protective Order” (Exhibit A); (f) during their depositions, witnesses in the action to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary and who have signed the “Agreement to be Bound by Protective Order” (Exhibit A). Pages of transcribed deposition testimony or exhibits to depositions that reveal confidential material must be separately bound by the court reporter and may not be disclosed to anyone except as permitted under this Stipulated Protective Order; (g) the author of the document or the original source of the information; and (h) any representative for any insurer affording a defense and/or indemnity for the Receiving Party in this litigation; and /// ///

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

Upton v. County of El Dorado, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

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

Related

Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu
447 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)