Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-00389/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-00389-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ESTATE OF WILLIAM HENNEFER et

al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

YUBA COUNTY et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:22-cv-00389-TLN-KJN 

ORDER

The parties appeared, through counsel, for an informal telephonic conference regarding 

discovery on September 8, 2023, before the undersigned. Attorney Patrick H. Dwyer appeared 

for plaintiffs, attorney Matthew W. Gross appeared for defendants.

1

 

According to the joint statement filed by the parties prior to the conference, plaintiffs seek 

a court order that: 1) plaintiffs be permitted to re-notice the depositions of Deputees Eck, 

Saecheo, Aguirre, Mullins, and Mallory, 2) defendants pay for costs and fees of the re-noticed 

depositions, and reimburse plaintiffs for the prior depositions, 3) a forensic audit of the computer 

defendant used to download the video be conducted, and 4) defendants produce names and a 

detailed description regarding the handling of the video. (ECF No. 28.) 

1 This matter was referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(1).

Case 2:22-cv-00389-TLN-CSK Document 30 Filed 09/11/23 Page 1 of 2
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

During the informal conference, however, it became apparent that the parties disagree 

about what drone footage videos were actually produced. According to plaintiffs, there are three 

videos that were never previously produced by defendants. According to defendants, all videos 

were produced to plaintiffs during the initial discovery, albeit in a low-quality format.

Because this disagreement is central to the instant discovery dispute, the court hereby 

orders that the parties further meet and confer to identify exactly what videos were produced and 

when. The court also orders that plaintiffs’ attorney be permitted to re-notice the deposition of 

Deputy Mallory, for which defendants are required to pay the costs of a court reporter and 

transcripts. Plaintiffs’ requests are otherwise denied without prejudice to renewal. 

ORDER

It is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The parties shall further meet and confer in person within the next thirty days at a 

mutually agreed upon location for the purpose of determining precisely which videos were 

produced and when.

2. Plaintiffs’ counsel may re-notice the deposition of Deputy Mallory. The costs of the court 

report and transcript for this re-deposition shall be shifted to defendants. The court 

declines to award attorneys’ fees at this time. 

3. Plaintiffs’ remaining requests are denied without prejudice to renewal.

Dated: September 10, 2023

henn.0389

Case 2:22-cv-00389-TLN-CSK Document 30 Filed 09/11/23 Page 2 of 2