Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06533/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06533-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

BRANCART & BRANCART

 Christopher Brancart (SBN 128475)

 Elizabeth Brancart (SBN 122092)

Post Office Box 686

Pescadero, CA 94060

Tel: (650) 879-0141

Fax: (650) 879-1103

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHELLE EZELL, et al., ) 

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

)

vs. )

)

)

EDWARDS THEATRES, INC., )

et al., )

)

Defendants. ) 

)

Case No. 1:04-CV-06533-SMS

JOINT STIPULATION RE

RULINGS AT DISCOVERY

CONFERENCE; ORDER 

On June 7, 2005, Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder conducted a telephonic

conference with the undersigned counsel for plaintiffs Michelle and Valerie Ezell and

for defendant Edwards Theatres, Inc., concerning plaintiffs’ proposed motion to

compel responses and further responses to discovery from Edwards Theatres, Inc.

During the conference, Magistrate Judge Snyder made the following rulings and

directed the parties to file this stipulation and proposed order setting forth those

rulings to be entered in this case:

A. Incident Reports

Plaintiffs seek unredacted copies of all incident reports previously produced

and seek all incident reports from the time period April 2002, when Edwards was

purchased by Regal Entertainment Group, to the present. The document production

Case 1:04-cv-06533-SMS Document 31 Filed 08/22/05 Page 1 of 5
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-

requests to which those incident reports are responsive are numbers 1, 13 and 20 of

plaintiffs’ first set of requests for the production of documents. Edwards has

produced incident reports from July 1, 2003, but has redacted the identifiers regarding

the theater patrons involved in the incidents and the employees/security officers

involved. 

To resolve this dispute:

1. Edwards shall produce copies of the incident reports

already produced that shall be unredacted to reveal the names of the

employees/security officers involved in the incident.

2. Plaintiffs provided Edwards with a list of incident reports

of interest on June 16, 2005. Counsel have jointly drafted a letter to be

sent by Edwards to the theater patrons identified in those incident

reports, informing them that plaintiffs’ counsel would like to speak with

them regarding their experience at Edwards and asking whether they are

willing to do so. A copy of that letter is attached hereto as exhibit 1.

Within seven days of the entry of this order, Edwards’ counsel will send

out the letters to the theater patrons identified on the incident reports and

will provide plaintiffs’ counsel with the names and contact information

of those persons who respond to the letters indicating that they are

willing to be contacted.

3. Plaintiffs may renew their request for third party

information with Magistrate Judge Snyder if the mailing results are

insufficient. 

B. Prior Complaints of Discrimination. 

Plaintiffs seek further responses to document requests 4, 13 and 14 and

interrogatory numbers 10 and 12 seeking documents, specifically the identification

and production of documents related to any prior administrative or civil complaints

Case 1:04-cv-06533-SMS Document 31 Filed 08/22/05 Page 2 of 5
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-

against Edwards Theatres, Inc. regarding discrimination (other than employmentrelated) since April 2002. 

To resolve this dispute:

1. Edwards will determine the number of administrative, state

and federal discrimination complaints [not employment related] filed or

brought against them within the state of in California for the years 2003,

2004. If the number of complaints is 20 or less, Edwards shall produce

copies of those complaints. If more than 20 such complaints are

identified, the parties shall discuss the issue with the Court for further

guidance. 

C. Incident Reports from Other Theaters.

Plaintiffs seek further responses to document requests 4, 13 and 14 seeking

documents, specifically security incident reports from other Edwards cinemas.

To resolve this dispute:

1. To the extent any exist, Edwards will produce incident

reports from the Bakersfield Stadium 14 in Bakersfield and the Valencia

Stadium 12 in Santa Clarita for the years 2003 and 2004. Those incident

reports may be redacted to cover the names and identifying information

of the theater patrons involved in the reported incidents. 

D. Identification of Movie Patrons

Plaintiffs seek a further response to document production request number 15,

which seeks “[a]ll documents that identify the names of persons who purchased

tickets for the February 7, 2004, showing of the movie “Monster” attended by

plaintiffs. Interrogatory number 6 seeks the same information in non-documentary

form. The purpose of this discovery request is to identify persons who may have

witnessed the incident about which plaintiffs complain.

To resolve this dispute:

Case 1:04-cv-06533-SMS Document 31 Filed 08/22/05 Page 3 of 5
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-

1. Edwards will provide to Magistrate Judge Snyder a list of

the members of Regal Entertainment Group’s frequent buyer program

who purchased tickets at the Fresno theater on February 7, 2004.

2. After receiving the list, Magistrate Judge Snyder may write

a letter to the persons identified, or will take such further action or make

such further ruling on the issue as she deems appropriate.

E. Edwards’ Target Audience.

Plaintiffs seek a further response to document production request number 17

and interrogatories 16 and 17, which seek marketing plans or advertising to attract

patrons to the Edwards Cinema, in order to establish the demographics of Edwards’

target audience, so that plaintiffs may compare their personal characteristics to that

of the target audience. 

To resolve this dispute:

1. Edwards will not make further responses to discovery at

this time.

2. The Court indicated that, in order to secure this type of

information, plaintiffs may seek to depose Edwards’ district manager or

other appropriate individual to determine what types of documents exist,

and then make a more narrowly tailored discovery request. 

F. Other Issues. 

1. Edwards will provide further responses to discovery to

interrogatory number 8 seeking the identity of the employees

responsible for (1) the management of the Fresno theater, (2) the

corporate subdivisions/departments having supervisorial responsibility

over the theater, (3) the district, and (4) the region in which it is located.

2. Edwards has responded that there are no “notices, notes,

memoranda, or correspondence” constituting or reflecting “policies,

procedures, and instructions . . . related to the provision of security

Case 1:04-cv-06533-SMS Document 31 Filed 08/22/05 Page 4 of 5
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

-5-

services,” to the Fresno theater other than the two-page policy document

produced, document 449-450. The Court indicated that plaintiffs may

wish to depose Edwards’ district manager in order to confirm this. 

G. Protective Order.

To protect the confidentiality of any third parties who (1) made formal civil or

administrative discrimination complaints against Edwards; (2) made complaints of

discrimination or unfair treatment to Edwards’ employees or management; or (3) who

are identified on any security or incident report created or maintained by Edwards

or its agents or employees, the parties have stipulated to issuance of a protective

order, lodged herewith. 

Unless otherwise provided herein, all further responses to discovery will be

made within 14 days of the entry of this order.

SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: July ____, 2005.

Respectfully submitted, 

BRANCART & BRANCART

/s

Elizabeth Brancart

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP 

/s

Christine A. Cantin 

Attorneys for Defendants

* * * * * * *

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 19, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06533-SMS Document 31 Filed 08/22/05 Page 5 of 5