Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01876/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01876-2/pdf.json

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

---

PROTECTIVE ORDER n:\lit\li2005\051686\00356878.doc 

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

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669

City Attorney 

JOANNE HOEPER, State Bar #114961

Chief Trial Deputy 

SEAN F. CONNOLLY, State Bar #152235 

Deputy City Attorney 

Fox Plaza 

1390 Market Street, 6th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94102-5408 

Telephone: (415) 554-3863 

Facsimile: (415) 554-3837 

E-Mail: sean.connolly@sfgov.org 

Attorneys for Defendants 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, 

SAN FRANCISCO POLICE CHIEF FONG, AND 

SAN FRANCISCO POLICE OFFICER DANNY MAY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JANET DEAN, individually, as successor 

to PAUL DEAN, and as Guardian Ad 

Litem for MARETA DEAN, a minor, and 

DARYL DEAN, a minor, SARA BECK, 

individually and as Guardian Ad Litem for 

MATTHEW DEAN, a minor, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, SAN FRANCISCO 

POLICE CHIEF HEATHER FONG, SAN 

FRANCISCO POLICE OFFICER 

DANNY MAY, DOES 1-50, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C 05-1876 EDL 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING 

CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL 

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) the parties have met and conferred and 

agree that the documents covered by this order require the protection of a protective order and that the 

mode of discovery of these documents be pursuant to this order. 

CASE NO. C 05-1876

Case 3:05-cv-01876-EDL Document 25 Filed 03/02/06 Page 1 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER n:\lit\li2005\051686\00356878.doc 

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

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the parties stipulate, though their attorneys of record, to the 

entry of an order as follows: 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 

1. Plaintiffs seek discovery of certain personnel records related to the individual 

defendants in this action. Defendants will produce certain personnel records to plaintiffs’ counsel 

pursuant to and conditioned upon this Protective Order. 

2. The materials to be produced will be referred to and identified as “CONFIDENTIAL" 

or "CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION" documents. 

3. The CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION shall not be exhibited, played 

or otherwise disclosed, by plaintiff’s counsel to other persons, except as specifically provided herein. 

4. Plaintiff’s Counsel may exhibit and/or disclose CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL 

INFORMATION only to the following categories of person and no other unless authorized by Order 

of the Court: 

 a. Plaintiff’s Counsel; 

 b. Retained experts, retained investigators or consultants retained by plaintiff’s 

counsel to assist in the evaluation, preparation, or trial of this case; however, before any expert, 

investigator, or consultant is permitted to review the CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL 

INFORMATION, such individual must agree to comply with the terms of this Protective Order by 

executing the document attached as Exhibit A. Plaintiff’s counsel shall file and serve any Agreement 

to Comply with the terms of the Order upon its execution; however, plaintiff’s counsel shall not be 

required to file any Agreement to Comply any earlier than the date that Expert Disclosures are 

required to be made. Experts, investigators, and consultants shall not have any power to authorize 

further disclosure of CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION to any other person. 

5. Counsel for plaintiff may not provide originals or copies of the CONFIDENTIAL 

PERSONNEL INFORMATION to any plaintiff absent the written agreement of counsel for the City 

or a Court Order. For purposes of evaluating the settlement value or potential jury verdict, counsel 

for plaintiff may discuss the general nature of the CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION 

CASE NO. C 05-1876

Case 3:05-cv-01876-EDL Document 25 Filed 03/02/06 Page 2 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER n:\lit\li2005\051686\00356878.doc 

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

with plaintiffs without disclosing any identifying details about a specific incident or any documents. 

Plaintiffs’ counsel may also review with a plaintiff any statement or interview given by that plaintiff. 

6. Nothing contained in this order shall prohibit any person, including any persons 

described in 4(a-b) above, from using or referring to CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL 

INFORMATION covered by this Protective Order in motion papers or pleadings filed with the Court, 

provided that adequate provision is made to protect the confidentiality of the CONFIDENTIAL 

PERSONNEL INFORMATION and provided that any portion of such motion papers or legal 

pleadings that reference said CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION, if filed, are filed 

under seal pursuant to the Court’s rules and procedures (see Civil Local Rule 79-5). 

7. In the event any person described in 4(a-b) above, desires to exhibit documents or 

disclose CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION covered under this stipulation to 

witnesses during trial or pretrial proceedings, such person shall meet and confer with counsel for 

defendants to reach an agreement, in accordance with the Court’s rules and procedures, on an 

appropriate method for disclosure. Unless otherwise agreed, transcripts and exhibits that incorporate 

documents and CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION covered under this stipulation 

shall be sealed in accordance with the Court’s rules and procedures, and shall be subject to the 

provisions of this Protective Order. 

8. Nothing in this Order shall be deemed to: (1) limit or waive any right of any party to 

resist or compel discovery with respect to documents or other material which may be claimed to be 

privileged or otherwise protected or protectable; (2) preclude any party at any time from seeking and 

obtaining from the court, on an appropriate showing, additional protection, including an order that 

material shall not be produced at all; or (3) constitute a ruling on the admissibility of any documents 

or other material as evidence in this action. 

9. All documents covered by this Order and copies thereof, including all copies provided 

to any persons described in 4(a-b) above, will be returned to the City at the termination of this 

litigation. On final disposition of this case, plaintiff’s counsel shall within 30 days after the final 

disposition of this case, without request or further order of this Court, return all Information to the 

Deputy City Attorney of record in this matter. The provisions of this Order, insofar as they restrict 

CASE NO. C 05-1876

Case 3:05-cv-01876-EDL Document 25 Filed 03/02/06 Page 3 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER n:\lit\li2005\051686\00356878.doc 

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

the communication and use of the documents or information covered by this Order, shall, without 

written permission of the City or further order of the court, continue to be binding after the 

conclusion of the action. 

10. If the Court finds that any person, including any person described in 4(a-b) above, is 

responsible for the unauthorized disclosure of any documents, records or Confidential Personnel 

Information disclosed pursuant to this Protective Order, plaintiffs or plaintiff’s counsel, or any person 

disclosing such documents, including any persons described in 4(a-b) above, or any of them, may be 

subject to sanctions and possible contempt. 

IT IS AGREED: 

Dated: February 28, 2006 

DENNIS J. HERRERA 

City Attorney 

SEAN F. CONNOLLY 

 Deputy City Attorneys 

By:_/s/ Sean F. Connolly_____________

SEAN F. CONNOLLY 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Dated: 2/7, 2006 

Randolf Daar, Esq. 

By: /s/ Randolph Daar 

RANDOLPH DAAR 

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

Dated: 2-10, 2006 

Matthew Kumin, Esq. 

By: /s/ Matthew Kumin 

MATTHEW KUMIN 

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

ORDER 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

____________________ _______________________________________ 

 MAG. JUDGE ELIZABETH LAPORTE 

DATED: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

CASE NO. C 05-1876

March 2, 2006

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte

Case 3:05-cv-01876-EDL Document 25 Filed 03/02/06 Page 4 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER n:\lit\li2005\051686\00356878.doc 

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

EXHIBIT A

CASE NO. C 05-1876

Case 3:05-cv-01876-EDL Document 25 Filed 03/02/06 Page 5 of 6
PROTECTIVE ORDER n:\lit\li2005\051686\00356878.doc 

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

Janet Dean et al. v. City and County of San Francisco, et al., Case No. C05-1876 EDL 

United States District Court, Northern District of California 

AGREEMENT TO COMPLY WITH STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR 

CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION 

 I, _________________, have read and understand the Court’s Protective Order for 

CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION. I agree to abide by all terms of the Order. In 

addition, I specifically understand and agree to the following: 

 1. I will not disclose the CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION to any other 

person. 

 2. I understand that I have no power to authorize any other person to review the 

CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION. 

 3. I agree not to make copies of the CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION. 

 4. I agree to return the CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL INFORMATION to the counsel for 

the party that produced it, at or before the conclusion of this litigation. 

 5. I understand that if I violate any of the terms of the Protective Order, then Plaintiffs, 

Plaintiffs’ Counsel, and I may be subject to sanctions or possible contempt. 

AGREED: 

 /s/Matthew Kumin 

DATE 2/27/06 MATTHEW KUMIN, ESQ. 

 

 /s/Randall Daar 

 DATE 2/16/06 RANDALL DAAR, ESQ. 

CASE NO. C 05-1876

Case 3:05-cv-01876-EDL Document 25 Filed 03/02/06 Page 6 of 6