Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-00753/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-00753-8/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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT VON MERTA,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN

FRANCISCO, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

No. C 09-00753 PJH (JCS)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART,

DENYING IN PART JOINT LETTER

[Docket No. 89]

On July 20, 2010, the parties filed a Joint Letter regarding unresolved discovery after a faceto-face meet and confer session.

On July 29, 2010, the Court held a telephonic hearing. Matthew Witteman, counsel for

Plaintiff, appeared. Meghan Higgins and Joshua White, counsel for Defendants, appeared.

For reasons stated on the record, and good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s request for QCA and Booking records is denied without prejudice to the

parties meeting and conferring on a possible sampling method. As framed, the

request would present a huge burden, and it is unlikely that the requested documents

would lead to admissible evidence. 

2. Plaintiff’s motion to compel the deposition of Chief Assistant District Attorney

Russel Giuinti is denied. Plaintiff may take a deposition of defendant under Rule

30(b)(6) on the policies and procedures of the City and County of San Francisco

designed to insure timely lease of arrestees when a determination is made not to

prosecute such persons.

3. Plaintiff may take a total of 12 depositions in this action.

Case 4:09-cv-00753-PJH Document 102 Filed 08/09/10 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

4. Defendant shall provide to plaintiff’s counsel, on an Attorney’s Eyes Only basis, a

printout of the CAD regarding the incident at issue in this case, with any reference to

the criminal history of the victim NOT redacted.

5. Defendants’s motion to quash the subpoenas for the production of documents served

on two city agencies three weeks before the close of discovery is granted.

6. Pusuant to agreement, the depositions of (1) the Mirage Hotel’s PMK and (2) Sigfried

& Roy’s manager shall take place by telephone.

7. The motion to compel the deposition of Jesse Lehman is granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 9, 2010 

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:09-cv-00753-PJH Document 102 Filed 08/09/10 Page 2 of 2