Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-01512/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-01512-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

C-02-1512 DISCOVERY ORDER Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN P. SIMON, 

Plaintiff,

v.

D. BRADLEY, ET AL.,

Defendants.

________________________________/

No. C 02-1512 JSW (JL)

ORDER Granting in Part 

Request for Discovery 

(Docket # 91)

Introduction

Plaintiff John P. Simon is suing D. Bradley and other defendants for an alleged

violation of his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff was a civil detainee at Alameda

North County Jail in 2001. He claims Bradley sprayed him with some form of pepper spray

while he was behind a locked cell door and that the spraying was unprovoked. Bradley

denies the incident occurred.

All discovery has been referred by the district court (Hon. Jeffrey S. White) as

provided by 28 U.S.C. §636(b) and Civil Local Rule 72.

Discovery Dispute

Plaintiff initially asked the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department to produce

documents related to incidents of the use of defense spray at North County Jail between

1995 and 2001. The Sheriff’s Department objected on the basis of overbreadth, relevance

Case 3:02-cv-01512-JSW Document 93 Filed 04/04/06 Page 1 of 3
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

C-02-1512 DISCOVERY ORDER Page 2 of 3

and burden. Both sides conferred and attempted to narrow the scope of the request.

Plaintiff now requests all inmate grievance reports alleging the use of defense sprays at the

jail from 2001 to the present. Plaintiff argues that the records might reveal evidence

showing how often pepper spray was used on inmates, who used it, for what purpose, and

whether or not the use was justified, and if not was the officer involved disciplined. Plaintiff

relies as well on recent deposition testimony from Sheriff’s Department personnel which

reveals that Sheriff’s officers were instructed not to use the spray inside the cells because

the ventilation system could possibly spread the spray into other areas, causing

widespread discomfort. Plaintiff anticipates the Sheriff’s Department using this policy to

prove the spray was not used on Plaintiff.

Defendant objects that Plaintiff’s request is too broad as to time and that even

reviewing and producing documents related to the 125 inmate complaints received during

2001 would take Sheriff’s deputies 63 hours over a three week period. 

Analysis

Rule 26(b)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, permits a party to obtain discovery

of any non-privileged material which is relevant to a claim or defense of any party. This

Court finds that documents related to complaints about the use of defense spray during the

year that Plaintiff was confined at North County Jail, when he alleges he was sprayed,

would be relevant to show similar incidents and the Sheriff’s Department response to them. 

Rule 26 also permits a court to limit discovery which is too burdensome in proportion

to its likely benefit to the case, among other factors. FRCP 26(b)(2)(iii). Defendants have

demonstrated that there would be some burden of reviewing and producing documents

even for the year that Plaintiff was confined at North County Jail. However, this burden is

not excessive, in proportion to the relevance of the information. Accordingly, this Court

orders Defendants to produce documents related to complaints of incidents involving

defense spray occurring in 2001. Compliance shall be due four weeks from the e-filing of

this order.

Case 3:02-cv-01512-JSW Document 93 Filed 04/04/06 Page 2 of 3
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

C-02-1512 DISCOVERY ORDER Page 3 of 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 4, 2006

__________________________________

JAMES LARSON

Chief Magistrate Judge

Case 3:02-cv-01512-JSW Document 93 Filed 04/04/06 Page 3 of 3