Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-03941/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-03941-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 380
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Property Damage
Cause of Action: 42:9601 CERCLA

---

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

1

 The letter briefs are found at Docket Nos. 1012-1014 in Avila, and Docket Nos. 173 and 174

in Nickerman.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DONNA AVILA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

WILLITS ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 99-03941 SI; No. C 06-2555 SI

ORDER RE: DISCOVERY

The parties have submitted letter briefs1 concerning plaintiffs’ objections to discovery seeking

information about plaintiffs’ evidence of exposure and causation of injury. At the November 16, 2007

case management conference in these related cases, the parties agreed, and the Court ordered, that

defendants would propound discovery regarding exposure and causation, and that plaintiffs would

respond by January 30, 2008. Defendants propounded interrogatories, document requests and requests

for admissions. Plaintiffs object that the Court did not authorize defendants to propound document

requests and requests for admissions, and that defendants’ discovery impermissibly seeks expert

opinion.

The Court finds plaintiffs’ objections lack merit, and plaintiffs are directed to respond to the

outstanding discovery requests. As the parties are well aware, and as this Court has observed on

numerous occasions, the Avila case has been pending for over eight years. Although plaintiffs have long

been on notice of the need to identify evidence of exposure and causation, thus far plaintiffs have failed

to do so. If plaintiffs intend to rely on expert opinion in support of their claims, plaintiffs must provide

Case 3:99-cv-03941-SI Document 1020 Filed 01/23/08 Page 1 of 2
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

2

such opinions in response to the discovery at issue.

Defendants state that they are amenable to proceeding with mediation of individual claims as

scheduled during the first two weeks of February 2008, and setting a new deadline of March 15, 2008

for plaintiffs’ discovery responses. The Court finds that this proposal is reasonable, as it will reduce

plaintiffs’ counsel’s workload if some plaintiffs settle. Accordingly, plaintiffs’ responses to the

outstanding discovery are due no later than March 15, 2008. As the Court informed plaintiffs at the

November 15, 2007 case management conference, if any plaintiff fails to provide discovery responses,

a negative inference and/or issue preclusion will result. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 23, 2008 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:99-cv-03941-SI Document 1020 Filed 01/23/08 Page 2 of 2