Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02782/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02782-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LUZ HERNANDEZ,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY OF NAPA, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-09-02782 EDL

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED

MOTION FOR IN CAMERA REVIEW

OF LAW ENFORCEMENT RECORDS

Plaintiff has subpoenaed the personnel records of former peace officer Donald Green from

his employer Napa State Hospital, which is administered by the California Department of Mental

Health (“DMH”). DMH has filed this motion requesting in camera review of the subpoenaed law

enforcement personnel records and the issuance of a protective order if information and/or

documents are disclosed. DMH argues that the production would impose an undue burden and

expense on DMH and would require the production of privileged or other protected matter. DMH

seeks an in camera review of the materiality and relevance of the information and documents

contained in such records, and requests that the Court modify the subpoena to allow it to submit

responsive personnel records under seal for an in camera review by the Court rather than directly to

the issuing attorney. Plaintiff does not oppose the motion. According to DMH’s unopposed motion,

Plaintiff has agreed to limit the scope of the subpoena to the DMH’s Internal Affairs investigation of

the April 1, 2008 incident and the citizen’s complaint submitted to DMH against Mr. Green as a

result of the incident. 

Case 3:09-cv-02782-EDL Document 88 Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(c)(3)(A), the Court “must” quash or modify a

subpoena that requires the disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, or subjects a person to

undue burden. DMH argues that the privacy interest in police records such as those in question must

be balanced against the interests of the party seeking discovery to determine if a right to privacy

exists. 

The Court finds good cause for granting DMH’s Motion without the need for oral argument,

and hereby Orders DMH to lodge the responsive documents directly with this Court (i.e, by hand

delivery) by no later than Monday, June 21, 2010 so that the Court may conduct an in camera

review. Following the Court’s review, it will determine which, if any, of the documents should be

produced and rule on DMH’s request for a protective order at that time.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 17, 2010 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02782-EDL Document 88 Filed 06/17/10 Page 2 of 2