Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-1_16-cv-00069/USCOURTS-ared-1_16-cv-00069-3/pdf.json

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

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

TAMMY TILLERY 

v. No. 1:16-cv-69-DPM 

WENDY LYNNE KELLEY, in her 

individual and official capacity as the 

PLAINTIFF 

Director of the ADC; DEXTER L. PAYNE, in his 

individual and official capacity as Deputy 

Director of the ADC; STEPHEN D. WILLIAMS 

in his individual and official capacity as Warden 

of the North Central Unit of the ADC; and 

BILLY W. INMAN, in his individual and official 

capacity as Deputy Warden of the North Central 

Unit of the ADC DEFENDANTS 

ORDER 

For the reasons stated on the record at the status conference on 

8 September 2016, the Court resolves the discovery disputes as follows: 

1. Mrs. Tillery may meet with Mr. Tillery once for two hours at the 

Calico Rock facility for trial preparation. During this meeting no privilege of 

confidential marital communications will exist. 

2. Defendants' deposition of Mr. Tillery at the Calico Rock facility will 

take place before Mrs. Tillery' s meeting with him. 

3. The depositions of Mr. Tillery and Mrs. Tillery shall both be taken 

under seal. All objections based on the privilege of confidential marital 

Case 1:16-cv-00069-DPM Document 26 Filed 09/13/16 Page 1 of 3
communications are reserved. Neither Mr. Tillery nor Mrs. Tillery may assert 

this privilege to avoid answering a deposition question about the claims and 

defenses in this case. As the Court noted at the hearing, and as Mrs. Tillery 

recognized, all her post-suspension communications with Mr. Tillery have 

been or are monitored by the ADC; so there is no privilege in them. Mrs. 

Tillery may not assert the privilege for Mr. Tillery at his deposition. Mrs. 

Tillery may assert the privilege for herself on written motion - with specific 

citations to one of the depositions - and argument. Due dates for this motion 

and a response will be set in the Final Scheduling Order. The parties must file 

all papers on the privilege issues under seal. The request for a protective 

order embedded in the Rule 26(f) report is otherwise denied. 

4. If Mrs. Tillery decides to file for in forma pauperis status, she may do 

so under seal. 

5. The Court adopts the parties' proposed discovery schedule, 

expedited discovery response times, and electronic service obligations. Ng 21 

at ~~4, 5 & 11. 

Case 1:16-cv-00069-DPM Document 26 Filed 09/13/16 Page 2 of 3
So Ordered. 

D.P. Marshall Jr. 

United States District Judge 

I 3 %tzk~ )..01 {p 

Case 1:16-cv-00069-DPM Document 26 Filed 09/13/16 Page 3 of 3