Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04217/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04217-19/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Civil Rights

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARVIN JOHNSON,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN

FRANCISCO, et al.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C06-4217 MMC (BZ)

ORDER GRANTING FURTHER

DISCOVERY

Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery came on for

hearing on August 31, 2007. Both sides were represented by

counsel. The court having reviewed all papers filed in

connection with the motion and having heard arguments of

counsel, for the reasons given during the hearing, IT IS

ORDERED as follows:

1. The San Francisco Giants shall produce for deposition

in accordance with Federal Rule 30(b)(6), the person most

knowledgeable about 

(a) The preparation and maintenance of the database

produced to plaintiffs which is Exhibit F to Mr. Leigh’s

declaration (the database).

Case 3:06-cv-04217-MMC Document 135 Filed 08/31/07 Page 1 of 3
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

2

(b) Why the database was discontinued, as it appears to

have been after 2003.

(c) The e-mail which is Bates-stamped number SFG0000376

and is part of Exhibit H to Mr. Leigh’s reply declaration (the

e-mail).

2. The Giants shall produce Officers Ganster and Murphy

to respond to the foundational questions asked during their

depositions and to such follow up questions as plaintiff may

ask consistent with the views announced by the court at this

and previous hearings about the scope of permissible

discovery. Defendants are cautioned that close questions

about the scope of discovery should be resolved in favor of

answering the question and later moving to strike the answer,

given existing time constraints. 

3. Mr. Sweet shall ascertain whether the documents

constituting Exhibit O to Mr. Leigh’s declaration pertain in

any fashion to the defendant Dino Marcic and so notify counsel

for plaintiff with a copy to the court by noon on Tuesday,

September 4, 2007. If they do, then the Giants shall provide

the person most knowledgeable about those documents as part of

the deposition ordered in paragraph 1.

4. The Giants shall produce Mr. Bair and Mr. Costa for

further deposition with respect to the database and the 

e-mail. If the Giants wish, they may combine these two

depositions with the 30(b)(6) deposition on these same

documents. 

5. Further 30(b)(6) deposition of Lieutenant McEachin is

DENIED without prejudice to being renewed if the 30(b)(6)

Case 3:06-cv-04217-MMC Document 135 Filed 08/31/07 Page 2 of 3
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

3

deposition of the Giants discloses City participation in the

preparation of the database.

6. These depositions shall be completed by Friday,

September 7, 2007.

7. Except as so granted, plaintiff’s motion is otherwise

DENIED.

A separate order will follow on the question of whether

preclusionary sanctions against the Giants will issue for the

30(b)(6) deposition with respect to their affirmative

defenses. 

Dated: August 31, 2007

 Bernard Zimmerman 

 United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-REFS\Johnson v. SF\ORD.GRANTING FURTHER DISC.wpd

Case 3:06-cv-04217-MMC Document 135 Filed 08/31/07 Page 3 of 3