Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05577/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05577-6/pdf.json

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

---

MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

Robert L. Leslie # 61872 

Alexander Bannon # 109249 

McInerney & Dillon PC 

1 Kaiser Plaza, Suite 1850 

Oakland, California, 94612 

Telephone: 510-465-7100 

Facsimile: 510-465-8556 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Lewis C. Nelson and Sons, Inc. 

Marshall C. Whitney, # 082952 

Stephen E. Carroll, # 116333 

William H. Littlewood, # 202877 

McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard 

Wayte & Carruth LLP 

P.O. Box 28912 

5 River Park Place East 

Fresno, CA 93720-1501 

Telephone: (559) 433-1300 

Facsimile: (559) 433-2300 

Attorneys for Defendant 

COUNTY OF FRESNO 

(SPACE BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY) 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

LEWIS C. NELSON AND SONS, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

COUNTY OF FRESNO, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 1: 04 CV 5577 REC DLB 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF 

DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT and 

ORDER THEREON 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 1 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 2 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

Plaintiff, Lewis C. Nelson and Sons, Inc. (“LCN”) and Defendant County of Fresno 

(County), hereby submit this Stipulation Re: Resolution of Discovery Disagreement; Order 

Thereon, in connection with LCN’s Motion to Compel the Production of Documents, currently 

set to be heard before this Court on Friday August 19, 2005. The Parties’ resolution as to each of 

the categories is set forth in order below, and identified by the category and the corresponding 

request in dispute. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 

The documents and categories of documents identified in defendant County of Fresno’s 

Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosure. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 

 In addition to the documents already produced, the County agrees to produce any and all 

staff analyses (also known as staff recommendations), including drafts thereof, and e-mails and 

correspondence relating to the same, to the extent such documents are located following a 

reasonable and diligent search consistent with the requirements of Rule 26, and to the further 

extent that such documents are not subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product 

doctrine. To the extent the documents referenced above cannot be located following the requisite 

good faith search, the County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for 

Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as such consistent with the requirements of Rule 

26. To the extent any documents are responsive to this request are subject to the attorney-client 

privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log consistent with the requirements of Rule 

26 will be provided to Plaintiff.1

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: 

All bids received since January 1, 1998 by defendant County of Fresno for construction 

contracts. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: 

In addition to the documents already produced, the County agrees to produce the three 

 

1

 A stipulation as to the timing of the production of both the documents and a privilege log are 

addressed globally below. 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 2 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 3 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

apparent low bids on each public construction project (including projects run by the Department 

of Public Works and the County Administrative Office, General Services Division [formerly 

known as the Department of General Services]) for the time period January 1, 1998 to present. 

Subject to this agreed limitation, all responsive documents will be produced to the extent such 

documents are located following a reasonable and diligent search consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such documents are not subject to the 

attorney-client privilege and/or work product. To the extent the documents referenced above 

cannot be located following the requisite good faith search, the County will provide a 

supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as 

such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any documents are responsive to 

this request are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege 

log consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: 

All indexes of invitations to bid by the County of Fresno for invitation to bid since 

January 1, 1998 for construction contracts. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: 

 The County does not believe any document fitting the description contained in Category 3 

exist. To the extent the documents referenced above cannot be located following an additional 

good faith search, the County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for 

Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as such consistent with the requirements of Rule 

26. Should any such non-privileged document responsive to this request, the County agrees to 

produce the same. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: 

All indexes of bids received by the County of Fresno since January 1, 1998 for 

construction contracts. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: 

 The Resolution of Disagreement re Request for Production No. 3 is incorporated herein by 

reference. 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 3 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 4 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: 

All recommendations for award of construction contracts to or for the Board of 

Supervisors of Fresno County since January 1, 1998 for construction contracts. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: 

Subject to the agreed limitations set forth in connection with Resolution of Disagreement 

Re Request for Production No. 2, the County will produce all documents responsive to this 

Request. Subject to this agreed limitation, all responsive documents will be produced to the 

extent such documents are located following a reasonable and diligent search consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such documents are not subject to the 

attorney-client privilege and/or work product. To the extent the documents referenced above 

cannot be located following the requisite good faith search, the County will provide a 

supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as 

such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any documents responsive to this 

request are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6: 

All bid spread sheets for County of Fresno construction contracts since January 1, 1998. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6: 

 Subject to the agreed limitations set forth in connection with Resolution of Disagreement 

Re Request for Production No. 2, the County will produce all documents responsive to this 

Request. Subject to this agreed limitation, all responsive documents will be produced to the 

extent such documents are located following a reasonable and diligent search consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such documents are not subject to the 

attorney-client privilege and/or work product. To the extent the documents referenced above 

cannot be located following the requisite good faith search, the County will provide a 

supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as 

such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any documents responsive to this 

request are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 4 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 5 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7: 

All construction contract awards by the County of Fresno since January 1, 1998. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7: 

Subject to the agreed limitations set forth in connection with Resolution of Disagreement 

Re Request for Production No. 2, the County will produce all documents responsive to this 

Request. Subject to this agreed limitation, all responsive documents will be produced to the 

extent such documents are located following a reasonable and diligent search consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such documents are not subject to the 

attorney-client privilege and/or work product. To the extent the documents referenced above 

cannot be located following the requisite good faith search, the County will provide a 

supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as 

such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any documents responsive to this 

request are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: 

All protests of award of any County of Fresno construction contracts since January 1, 

1998. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: 

Subject to the agreed limitations set forth in connection with Resolution of Disagreement 

Re Request for Production No. 2, the County will produce all documents responsive to this 

Request. Subject to this agreed limitation, all responsive documents will be produced to the 

extent such documents are located following a reasonable and diligent search consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such documents are not subject to the 

attorney-client privilege and/or work product. To the extent the documents referenced above 

cannot be located following the requisite good faith search, the County will provide a 

supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as 

such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any documents responsive to this 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 5 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 6 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

request are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: 

All correspondence, analysis, comments, reviews, and communications about any protest 

of award of any County of Fresno construction contract since January 1, 1998. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: 

The County agrees to produce non-privileged documents responsive to this request to the 

extent such documents are maintained together with, or in the same location as, any protests that 

may be produced pursuant to Category No. 8. Subject to this agreed limitation, all responsive 

documents will be produced to the extent such documents are located following a reasonable and 

diligent search consistent with the requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such 

documents are not subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product. To the extent the 

documents referenced above cannot be located following the requisite good faith search, the 

County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents 

(Set One) indicating as such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any 

documents responsive to this request are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work 

product doctrine, a privilege log consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to 

Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: 

All analysis, comments, opinions, and recommendations as to whether any bid for a 

construction contract since January 1, 1998, complied or did not comply with subcontractor 

listing requirements of California Public Contract Code Section 4104. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: 

 The County agrees to produce non-privileged documents responsive to this request to the 

extent such documents are maintained together with, or in the same location, as any protests that 

may be produced. Subject to this agreed limitation, all responsive documents will be produced to 

the extent such documents are located following a reasonable and diligent search consistent with 

the requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such documents are not subject to the 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 6 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 7 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

attorney-client privilege and/or work product. To the extent the documents referenced above 

cannot be located following the requisite good faith search, the County will provide a 

supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as 

such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any documents responsive to this 

request are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: 

All bids rejected by the County of Fresno since January 1, 1998 for failure to comply with 

the subcontractor listing requirements of California Public Contract Code Section 4104. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: 

In addition to the documents already produced, the County will produce any further 

documents responsive to this request to the extent such documents are located following a 

reasonable and diligent search consistent with the requirements of Rule 26, and to the further 

extent that such documents are not subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product. 

To the extent the documents referenced above cannot be located following the requisite good 

faith search, the County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for 

Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as such consistent with the requirements of Rule 

26. To the extent any documents responsive to this request are subject to the attorney-client 

privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log consistent with the requirements of Rule 

26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: 

All letters, memos, emails, manuals, guides, books, policies, procedures, regulations, 

rules, ordinances, comments, or other documents, interpreting, implementing, discussion, 

explaining, analyzing or commenting upon the subcontractor listing requirements of California 

Public Contract Code Section 4104. (Note: This request does not include published case reports 

or published legal treatises.) 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: 

The County will produce any documents responsive to this request to the extent such 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 7 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 8 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

documents are located following a reasonable and diligent search consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such documents are not subject to the 

attorney-client privilege and/or work product. To the extent the documents referenced above 

cannot be located following the requisite good faith search, the County will provide a 

supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as 

such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any documents responsive to this 

request are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13: 

All supplemental information on subcontractors required to be listed, submitted by bidder 

within 24 hours after the deadline for receipt of bids since January 1, 1998 pursuant to a 

requirement in the County’s invitation for bid. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13: 

In addition to the documents already produced and subject to the agreed limitations set 

forth in Resolution of Disagreement Re Request for Production No. 2, the County will produce 

any further documents responsive to this request to the extent such documents are located 

following a reasonable and diligent search consistent with the requirements of Rule 26, and to the 

further extent that such documents are not subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work 

product doctrine. To the extent the documents referenced above cannot be located following the 

requisite good faith search, the County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s 

Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as such consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26. To the extent any documents responsive to this request are subject to 

the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26 will be provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: 

All bids rejected by the County of Fresno since January 1, 1998 by reason of a failure to 

submit within 24-hours after the deadline to receive bids by California Public Contract Code 

Section 4104 supplemental information on subcontract or required to be listed. 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 8 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 9 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: 

The County does not believe any document fitting the description contained in Category 

14 exists. To the extent the documents referenced above cannot be located following an 

additional good faith search, the County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s 

Request for Production of Documents (Set One) indicating as such consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 26. Should any such non-privileged document(s) responsive to this request 

exist, the County agrees to produce the same. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: 

All analysis, comments, opinions, reviews, and recommendations as to whether any bid 

for a construction contract since January 1, 1998, complied or did not comply with a requirement 

in the invitation to bid to provide, supplemental information about subcontractors required to be 

listed by California Public Contract Code Section 4104. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: 

Other than documents already produced to date, the County does not believe any 

additional document fitting the description contained in Category 15 exists. To the extent the 

documents referenced above cannot be located following an additional good faith search, the 

County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents 

(Set One) indicating as such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. Should any such nonprivileged document(s) responsive to this request exist, the County agrees to produce the same. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: 

All letters, memos, emails, manuals, guides, books, policies, procedures, regulations, 

rules, comments, or other documents, interpreting, implementing, discussion, explaining, 

analyzing or commenting upon the requirement to provide supplemental information on 

subcontractors required to be listed by California Public Contract Code Section 4104. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: 

Other than documents already produced to date, the County does not believe any 

additional document fitting the description contained in Category 16 exists. To the extent the 

documents referenced above cannot be located following an additional good faith search, the 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 9 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 10 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents 

(Set One) indicating as such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. Should any such nonprivileged document(s) responsive to this request exist, the County agrees to produce the same. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17: 

All memorandums, guidelines, manuals, handbooks, rules, recommendations and other 

writings by the County of Fresno in the preparation of bidding documents or the consideration of 

award of contracts, in effect or used since January 1, 1998. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17: 

The County believes that the only documents responsive to this request are the bidder’s 

checklists and contract administrator’s check lists. The County will produce all documents 

responsive to this request to the extent such documents are located following a reasonable and 

diligent search consistent with the requirements of Rule 26, and to the further extent that such 

documents are not subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. To the 

extent the documents referenced above cannot be located following the requisite good faith 

search, the County will provide a supplemental response to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of 

Documents (Set One) indicating as such consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. To the 

extent any documents are responsive to this request are subject to the attorney-client privilege 

and/or work product doctrine, a privilege log consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 will be 

provided to Plaintiff. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18: 

All analysis, comments, opinions, reviews or recommendations or other documents 

regarding any of the bids, related documents for the construction of the County of Fresno’s 

Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 1. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18: 

Resolution of Disagreement Re Request for Production No. 1 is incorporated herein by 

this reference. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19: 

All analysis, comments, opinions, reviews or recommendations or other document about 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 10 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 11 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

any of the bids, or related bid documents, or the invitation to bid documents for the construction 

of the County of Fresno’ s Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 2. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19: 

 Resolution of Disagreement Re Request for Production No. 1 is incorporated herein by 

this reference. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20: 

The documents showing all cost increases and the final cost to the County of Fresno for 

the Contract with Harris Construction Company, Inc. for the County of Fresno’s Juvenile Justice 

Campus, Bid Package 1. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20: 

The County agrees to produce all approved change orders relating to County of Fresno’s 

Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 1. As the project is continuing, the Parties agree that the 

County shall produce any change orders approved subsequent to the production made pursuant to 

this stipulation, which agreement is consistent with the County’s continuing discovery obligation 

under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21: 

The documents showing all cost increases and the final cost to the County of Fresno for 

the contract the County awarded to the Clark Construction Group, Inc. for the County of Fresno’s 

Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 2. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21: 

 The County agrees to produce all approved change orders relating to County of Fresno’s 

Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 2. As the project is continuing, the Parties agree that the 

County shall produce any change orders approved subsequent to the production made pursuant to 

this stipulation, which obligation is consistent with the County’s continuing discovery obligation 

under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22: 

All bids, supplementary information and other documents from bidders on the County of 

Fresno’s Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 1. 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 11 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 12 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22: 

The County believes that all non-privileged documents responsive to this request have 

been produced. The County has agreed, however, to conduct a further good faith search 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 to confirm this belief. To the extent additional nonprivileged documents responsive to this request are located, they will be produced by the County. 

The County will supplement its response to this Request to confirm that all documents responsive 

to this request have been produced, consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23: 

All communication regarding the award of, or the rejection or possible rejection of any 

bids of the County of Fresno’s Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 1. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23: 

The County believes that all non-privileged documents responsive to this request have 

been produced. The County has agreed, however, to conduct a further good faith search 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 to confirm this belief. To the extent additional nonprivileged documents responsive to this request are located, they will be produced by the County. 

The County will supplement its response to this Request to confirm that all documents responsive 

to this request have been produced, consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: 

All bids, supplementary information and other documents from bidders on the County of 

Fresno’s Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 2. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: 

The County believes that all non-privileged documents responsive to this request have 

been produced. The County has agreed, however, to conduct a further good faith search 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 to confirm this belief. To the extent additional nonprivileged documents responsive to this request are located, they will be produced by the County. 

The County will supplement its response to this Request to confirm that all documents responsive 

to this request have been produced, consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 12 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 13 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25: 

All communication regarding the award of, or the rejection of, or the possible rejection of 

any bids on the County of Fresno’s Juvenile Justice Campus, Bid Package 2. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25: 

 The County believes that all non-privileged documents responsive to this request have 

been produced. The County has agreed, however, to conduct a further good faith search 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 to confirm this belief. To the extent additional nonprivileged documents responsive to this request are located, they will be produced by the County. 

The County will supplement its response to this Request to confirm that all documents responsive 

to this request have been produced, consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26: 

All memorandums, email, letters and other documents which contain a reference to Lewis 

C. Nelson and Sons, Inc. or, Dwight Nelson. 

RESOLUTION OF DISAGREEMENT RE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26: 

 The County believes that all non-privileged documents responsive to this request have 

been produced. The County has agreed, however, to conduct a further good faith search 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 26 to confirm this belief. To the extent additional nonprivileged documents responsive to this request are located, they will be produced by the County. 

The County will supplement its response to this Request to confirm that all documents responsive 

to this request have been produced, consistent with the requirements of Rule 26. 

STIPULATION RE TIMING OF PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

 The parties further stipulate and agree that the County shall begin production of, or 

otherwise make available for inspection and copying, the documents agreed to be produced on or 

before Friday September 2, 2005. In light of exigent circumstances discussed among the Parties 

counsel, the County shall have up to and until Friday September 9, 2005 to complete the 

production or otherwise make all documents agreed to be produced available for inspection and 

copying. 

 It is further stipulated and agreed that the County will serve via mail its supplemental 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 13 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 14 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

response to LCN’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) on or before Friday 

September 9, 2005. It is further stipulated and agreed that the County will serve its privilege log 

via mail on or before September 9, 2005. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

DATED: August 17, 2005 McInerney & Dillon PC 

 By_______________/s/________________ 

 Alexander Bannon 

 Attorneys for plaintiff 

 Lewis C. Nelson and Sons, Inc. 

DATED: August 17, 2005 McCORMICK, BARSTOW, SHEPPARD 

WAYTE & CARRUTH LLP 

By: /s/ 

Marshall C. Whitney 

William H. Littlewood 

Attorney’s for Defendant 

County of Fresno 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 14 of 15
MCCORMICK, BARSTOW,

SHEPPARD, WAYTE &

CARRUTH LLP 

5 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST

FRESNO, CA 93720-1501 

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 

856199.v1 15 

STIPULATION RE: RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT 

[PROPOSED ORDER] 

 This Court, having read and reviewed the Stipulation Re: Resolution of Discovery 

Disagreement and good cause appearing therefore, hereby ORDERS as follows: 

 1. The County shall begin producing, or otherwise make available for inspection and 

copying, the documents agreed to be produced pursuant to the Parties’ Stipulation on or before 

Friday September 2, 2005. 

 2. The County shall have produced, or otherwise have made available for inspection 

and copying, all documents agreed to be produced pursuant to the Parties’ Stipulation on or 

before Friday 9, 2005. 

 3. The County shall serve via mail its supplemental response to LCN’s Request for 

Production of Documents (Set One) on or before Friday September 9, 2005. 

 4. The County shall serve via mail its privilege log on or before Friday September 9, 

2005. 

DATED: August 24, 2005 

 ______/s/ Dennis L. Beck__________ 

 Hon. Dennis L. Beck 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 1:04-cv-05577-LJO -DLB Document 58 Filed 08/25/05 Page 15 of 15