Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01483/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01483-16/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THE ESTATE OF CECIL ELKINS, JR., et 

al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:13-cv-01483-AWI-SAB

ORDER VACATING INFORMAL 

TELECONFERENCE AND ADDRESSING 

INFORMAL DISCOVERY DISPUTE (ECF 

No. 94)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’

REQUEST TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING 

ORDER (ECF No. 92)

FIFTEEN DAY DEADLINE

I.

RELEVANT BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on September 12, 

2013. The action is currently proceeding on the fourth amended complaint filed on April 28, 

2015. The allegations in the complaint relate to November 13, 2012 incident in which Cecil 

Elkins (hereafter decedent) fled from police and was shot in the back by Defendant Hipolito 

Pelayo. (ECF No. 72 at ¶ 14.) Decedent died as a result of his injuries. (Id. at ¶ 17.) Plaintiffs 

bring this action against Defendant Hipolito Pelayo alleging excessive force in violation of the 

Fourth Amendment, deprivation of family relationship in violation of the Fourteenth 

Amendment, and state law claims for wrongful death, assault, battery, and violation of the Bane 

Act.

Case 1:13-cv-01483-AWI-SAB Document 95 Filed 12/03/15 Page 1 of 4
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

On June 17, 2015, an order issued amending the scheduling order and discovery in this 

action was to close on December 1, 2015. (ECF No. 76.) On December 1, 2015, Plaintiff filed a 

motion to continue the discovery cut-off date in this action and Defendant filed a discovery 

dispute letter. (ECF Nos. 92, 94.) Plaintiff was provided with the opportunity to submit a letter 

brief by 3:00 p.m. on December 2, 2015, however no letter brief was submitted. The Court finds 

that the discovery dispute is suitable for decision without a hearing. The informal teleconference 

set for December 3, 2015 at 3:00 p.m. is vacated and the parties are not required to call at that 

time. 

II.

DISCUSSION

A. Motion to Amend Scheduling Order

Pursuant to the scheduling order, discovery in this action closed on December 1, 2015. 

Plaintiff seeks to extend the discovery deadline to January 4, 2016 to conduct further discovery 

in this action. Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which governs the modification 

of the scheduling order provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause and 

with the judge’s consent.” 

In this instance, Plaintiff was not informed of the name of one of the witnesses to the 

events alleged in the complaint until one day prior to the discovery cut-off. Due to the timing of 

the disclosure, Plaintiff could not timely notice a deposition prior to the discovery cut-off date. 

Defendant has also filed a discovery dispute letter seeking the Court’s assistance in compelling 

production of third party records. As all parties in this action are still seeking discovery, the 

Court finds good cause exists to amend the scheduling order. The parties shall complete all nonexpert discovery in this action by January 4, 2016. The parties are advised that all non-expert 

discovery, including hearings on any motion to compel, must be completed by the discovery cutoff date. See Scheduling Order Part VI, ECF No. 76.

B. Non-Party Subpoenas

Defendant has served subpoenas duces tecum on the California Correctional Health Care 

Services, Tulare County Probation Office, Tulare County Mental Health Department, and 

Case 1:13-cv-01483-AWI-SAB Document 95 Filed 12/03/15 Page 2 of 4
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

Turning Point. Each of the entities responded that the records sought cannot be released without 

a release from the decedent or a court order. Defendant now requests the Court’s assistance in 

compelling the non-parties to produce records pursuant to the previously served subpoena duces 

tecum. Plaintiffs do not object to the request. Therefore, the Court shall grant the requests as to 

non-parties California Health Care Services, Tulare County Probation Department and Kern 

County Mental Health Department.

Defendant also seeks records from Turning Point. The non-party entity has objected and 

requires that any order compelling production of records comply with federal regulations 42 

C.F.R. sections 2.13(a), 2.61-267. The federal regulations require that, in ordering production of 

a patient’s drug and alcohol abuse treatment records, the Court must find good cause by 

determining that:

(1) Other ways of obtaining the information are not available or would not be 

effective; and

(2) The public interest and need for the disclosure outweigh the potential injury to 

the patient, the physician-patient relationship and the treatment services.

42 C.F.R. § 264(d). Defendant has provided no information on which the Court could find that 

the records sought are relevant in this action, much less that there is no other manner in which to 

obtain the information or that the need for disclosure outweighs the privacy and confidentiality 

interests at stake. Therefore, Defendant’s request to compel production of Turning Point records 

is denied.

Accordingly, the Court shall grant Defendant’s request for a court order requiring 

production responsive to the subpoenas issued to the California Health Care Services, Tulare 

County Probation Department, and Kern County Mental Health Department, but deny the request 

to compel production of Turning Point records. Due to the nature of the documents requested 

any responsive documents shall be designated as confidential and subject to the October 29, 

2015 protective order issued in this action. 

C. Internal Revenue Service Request for Copy of Tax Return

Defendant also seeks an order compelling Plaintiffs to sign and return the Internal 

Revenue Service Request for Copy of Tax Return. Plaintiffs have not objected to this request. 

Case 1:13-cv-01483-AWI-SAB Document 95 Filed 12/03/15 Page 3 of 4
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

4

Therefore, Plaintiffs are ordered to provide Defendant with a signed Request for Copy of Tax 

Return for decedent.

III.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The informal teleconference set for December 3, 2015 is vacated;

2. Within fifteen days from the date of this order, the California Correctional Health 

Care Services shall produce documents responsive to the subpoena dated October 

29, 2015;

3. Within fifteen days from the date of this order, the Tulare County Probation 

Department shall produce documents responsive to the subpoena dated October 

29, 2015,

4. Within fifteen days from the date of this order, Jarod Araujo shall appear for 

deposition at a time agreeable to the participants; 

5. Within fifteen days from the date of this order, the Kern County Mental Health 

Department shall produce documents responsive to the subpoena dated October 

27, 2015;

6. Within fifteen days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiffs shall provide 

Defendant with a signed Request for Copy of Tax Return for decedent;

7. All documents produced in response to the subpoenas duces tecum shall be 

subject to the October 29, 2015 protective order entered in this action; and

8. Failure to comply with this order may result in the issuance of sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 3, 2015 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01483-AWI-SAB Document 95 Filed 12/03/15 Page 4 of 4