Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_79-cv-01630/USCOURTS-cand-3_79-cv-01630-42/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDREW LANCASTER, JEFFERY MILLS,

DEXTER WILLIAMS, WILLIAM DENNIS,

STEVE LIVADITIS, JIMMY VAN PELT,

H. LEE HEISHMAN III AND JOHNATON

GEORGE,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

JAMES E. TILTON, Acting Secretary,

California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation, and ROBERT L. AYERS, JR.,

Acting Warden, San Quentin State Prison,

Defendants. /

No. C 79-01630 WHA

ORDER RE FORMAT OF VIEW

AND EVIDENTIARY HEARING

After reviewing the parties’ submissions on the format of the evidentiary hearing and

view, the following is ordered:

1. The Court is inclined to deny the requests for a surprise visit. What if the Court

visited when one or more counsel were out of town or at a court hearing? All parties, however,

will be allowed to file short memoranda on what the procedure would be for a surprise visit. 

Would defendants have equipment ready or would such a visit be without the benefit of

equipment? Please file your memoranda by NOON on JULY 31, 2007.

2. With respect to the view, plaintiffs’ counsel shall be allowed to point out items

of interest as well, but the Court wants to minimize the amount of verbal information and the

amount of argument. Counsel shall identify points of interest but this will not be an opportunity

Case 3:79-cv-01630-WHA Document 1167 Filed 07/24/07 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

2

for extended argument. The purpose of this view is to have a non-controversial geography

lesson of the facility. This should also include the exercise yards in controversy. The parties

must MEET AND CONFER regarding the itinerary and features to be observed during the view. 

3. With respect to plaintiffs’ request for discovery (Resp. at 5, ln. 6), they will be

allowed to take one deposition of an appropriate person. The deposition must be completed on

or before AUGUST 21, 2007.

4. With respect to plaintiffs’ request for additional prisoner testimony, the Court

denies the request without prejudice. If plaintiffs make an offer of proof as to what the

testimony would be, the Court will consider whether to augment the witness list. The purpose

of the hearing is to see and hear live the declarants of record and to allow cross-examination of

them so that the fact differences between them can be resolved, not to allow both sides to bring

in new witnesses beyond those who have already given declarations. 

5. With respect to defendants’ inquiry about the witnesses that will be called, all

prisoners who filed a declaration relevant to the issues that need resolution, whether in support

of the opening brief or in support of the reply, may testify at the hearing.

6. The records custodian responsible for maintaining the prisoners’ central and

medical files may be added to the witness list for purposes of authenticating any inmate records.

7. Plaintiffs’ request for an expert is denied. Both parties had ample time to present

their best cases when the briefs were filed. The purpose of the hearing is to resolve

inconsistencies in the present record. The Court will not allow these proceedings to spin out of

control by allowing either side to pile on yet new witnesses, at least not without a very good

reason.

8. With respect to the issue of restraints raised by plaintiffs, the need for and extent

of any shackling will be left to the discretion of San Quentin officials.

9. The hearing and view will take place from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. on OCTOBER

10, 2007. If the hearing cannot be finished in that amount of time, another date will be set for

Case 3:79-cv-01630-WHA Document 1167 Filed 07/24/07 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

3

completion of the hearing. Advise when we must arrive to actually start the hearing by 8:00

a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 24, 2007. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:79-cv-01630-WHA Document 1167 Filed 07/24/07 Page 3 of 3