Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520-554/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RALPH COLEMAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK JFM P

vs.

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Pursuant to court order, this matter came on for hearing before the

undersigned on a stipulated request for order shortening time for hearing on a motion by

plaintiffs to expedite discovery responses in the above-captioned case. Aaron J. Fischer,

Esq. appeared as counsel for plaintiffs. Deborah J. Vorous, Deputy Attorney General,

appeared as counsel for defendants. After review of the papers filed by the parties and

consideration of the arguments of counsel, and good cause appearing, the request for

order shortening time will be granted.

The dispute at bar arises from a motion to terminate the instant action filed

by defendants on January 7, 2013. Plaintiffs seek an order expediting all responses to

discovery requests propounded in connection with said motion, requiring said responses

to be served fourteen days after service of such requests. At the hearing, the parties

1

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 4306 Filed 01/25/13 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

represented that to date they have been working expeditiously to set up prison tours and

depositions and to provide documents responsive to production requests in advance of

said tours and depositions. Defendants’ objection to the instant motion turns principally

on an unwillingness to commit to a timeframe for responding to as yet unserved discovery

requests. Since defendants’ motion in this case may trigger an automatic stay effective

April 7, 2013, and good cause appearing, plaintiffs’ motion will be granted. In the

ordinary course, responses to discovery requests propounded in connection with

defendants’ motion to terminate this action shall be served within fourteen days of service

of the request.

In addition, given the exigencies of the proceedings on defendants’ motion

to terminate, the court finds good cause to set a procedure for resolution of any discovery

disputes that may arise in connection with that motion. The provisions of Local Rule 251

will not apply to said disputes. If a discovery dispute arises that cannot be resolved the

parties shall file a joint statement not to exceed two pages setting forth their respective

positions. Within two business days of such filing, the court shall issue an order either

resolving the dispute or setting the matter for hearing in person or telephonically.

Finally, the court notes that the stipulation for order shortening time was

also accompanied by a notice of motion to expedite discovery responses in proceedings

on a motion filed by defendants before the three-judge court. At the hearing the parties

acknowledged that the stipulation for order shortening time does not extend to the notice

of motion to expedite discovery responses in the three-judge court proceedings. This

court makes no ruling affecting discovery matters concerning the three-judge court

proceedings.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The January 16, 2013 stipulated request for order shortening time is

granted.

2

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 4306 Filed 01/25/13 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

2. Plaintiffs’ motion to expedite discovery responses in proceedings on

defendants’ motion to terminate the above-captioned action is granted.

3. Responses to discovery requests propounded in connection with

defendants’ motion to terminate this action shall be served within fourteen days of service

of the request.

4. The provisions of Local Rule 251 will not apply to discovery disputes

that may arise in connection with defendants’ motion to terminate this action. If a

discovery dispute arises that cannot be resolved the parties shall file a joint statement not

to exceed two pages setting forth their respective positions. Within two business days of

such filing, the court shall issue an order either resolving the dispute or setting the matter

for hearing in person or telephonically.

DATED: January 25, 2013.

12

cole0520.oah124

3

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 4306 Filed 01/25/13 Page 3 of 3