Wood v. Contra Costa County

Opinion

1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ANDREA WOOD, et al., Case No. 21-cv-00611-MMC 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S 9 V. MOTION FOR DISCOVERY 10 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, et al., 44 Defendants. 12

2 13 The Court is in receipt of plaintiff's motion, filed April 23, 2021, titled "Discovery S 14 || Requested." Having read and considered the motion, the Court rules as follows. 3 15 To the extent plaintiff seeks an order requiring any party in the above-titled case to 16 || provide her with discovery, the motion is hereby DENIED, without prejudice to plaintiff's 17 || first seeking discovery from defendants. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 (setting forth 5 18 || procedure by which party can seek documents in another party's possession). 19 To the extent plaintiff seeks an order requiring the state court conducting the 20 || dependency proceedings to provide plaintiff with “all evidence, all testimony, [and] full 21 case files" (See PI.'s Mot. at 1), the motion is hereby DENIED, as the Court lacks 22 || jurisdiction to reverse the state court's denial of plaintiff's motion for such documents (see 23 || Pl.'s Mot. Exs. A and B). See Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Brotherhood of 24 || Locomotive Engineers, 398 U.S. 281, 296-97 (1970) (holding district courts "possess no 25 || power whatever to sit in. . . review of state court decisions"). 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 || Dated: April 27, 2021 tebe □□□□□ INE M. CHESNEY 28 United States District Judge