Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-04075/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-04075-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN MEAS,

Plaintiff, No. C 08-4075 PJH

v. ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTION FOR GAG ORDER

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

Defendants’ motion for a gag order against plaintiff’s counsel is DENIED, based on

the representation by plaintiff’s counsel Benjamin Nisenbaum at the pretrial conference that

he “did not . . . intend . . . to talk to the press about this case during the pendency of the

trial” and “would not communicate with the media[;]” and that he “understood this promise –

and represented as much to the Court – to include in its scope comments regarding any

other existing case or complaint relating to Defendant Officer Serna and concerning

Defendant Officer Serna generally.” Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion at 2, 4. 

The court is satisfied that these representations obviate the need to consider imposing any

sort of gag order (even assuming that such an order would be constitutionally permissible

under the circumstances presented).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 8, 2010 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:08-cv-04075-PJH Document 127 Filed 07/08/10 Page 1 of 1