Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-05338/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-05338-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination

---

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

C-05-5338 DISCOVERY ORDER Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PEREZ, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SAFETY-KLEEN,

Defendants.

________________________________/

No. C 05-5338 PJH (JL)

ORDER

The Court received letters from counsel for Defendant and Plaintiffs, who are

preparing for FRCP 30(b)(6) depositions of Defendant’s employees, pursuant to this

Court’s order filed at Docket # 105. Defendant’s counsel, in an e-mail he provided to the

Court, says that he “[doesn’t] intend to allow my witnesses to respond to examination by

more than one attorney.” Plaintiffs are the hundreds of members of a putative class, and

contend it would be more efficient to have their attorneys ask their questions themselves

rather than pass notes back and forth while one of them questions the witness.

The law of this Circuit is that it is not a per se abuse of a witness to be questioned by

more than one attorney and there is no provision of the California Civil Code governing

depositions which prohibits questioning by two attorneys. See Cal.Code of Civ.Proc. §§

2016-2036.5 (West Supp.1983). Rockwell Intern., Inc. v. Pos-A-Traction Industries, Inc.

712 F.2d 1324, *1325 (9th Cir.1983).

Case 4:05-cv-05338-PJH Document 111 Filed 02/14/08 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

C-05-5338 DISCOVERY ORDER Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, the depositions shall proceed and Plaintiffs may have more than one

attorney question each witness, as long as such questioning is not an abuse of the witness.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 14, 2008

__________________________________

 JAMES LARSON

 Chief Magistrate Judge

G:\JLALL\CHAMBERS\CASES\CIV-REF\05-5338\order-107-109.wpd

Case 4:05-cv-05338-PJH Document 111 Filed 02/14/08 Page 2 of 2