Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-01351/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-01351-281/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCIANO PLATA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., et al.,

Defendants.

NO. C01-1351 TEH

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’

FEBRUARY 14, 2013 MOTION

FOR DISCOVERY

This matter came before the Court on February 19, 2013, on Plaintiffs’ motion for

discovery. Because Defendants’ consultants are in town this week and time is of the essence,

the Court issues its rulings now, with a more complete order to follow. For reasons that will

be explained by subsequent order, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiffs’ motion to re-open discovery is GRANTED to allow Plaintiffs an

opportunity to prepare for a potential termination motion at the same time as Defendants.

2. Plaintiffs’ motion to accompany Defendants’ consultants on their prison visits is

GRANTED. All counsel will be permitted to accompany all consultants and experts on

prison tours, but opposing counsel shall not be permitted to participate or listen in on any

communications between retained consultants and experts and their counsel, or between

consultants and experts retained by the same party.

//

//

//

//

Case 3:01-cv-01351-JST Document 2542 Filed 02/19/13 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

3. Plaintiffs’ oral motion to participate in meetings between Defendants’ consultants

and the Receiver’s executive staff is DENIED. Both parties’ consultants and counsel may

communicate with the Receiver’s executive staff without the presence of opposing counsel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 02/19/13 

THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 3:01-cv-01351-JST Document 2542 Filed 02/19/13 Page 2 of 2