Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-03685/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-03685-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)

---

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE PRODUCTION AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF 

DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TOP HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 19851 

KIROLA ET AL. V. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET AL., CASE NO. 4:07-CV-03685 SBA (EMC) 

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

 

Guy B. Wallace, State Bar No. 176151 

Mark T. Johnson, State Bar No. 76904 

Andrew P. Lee, State Bar No. 245903 

SCHNEIDER WALLACE 

COTTRELL BRAYTON KONECKY LLP 

180 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 421-7100 

Facsimile: (415) 421-7105 

Email: gwallace@schneiderwallace.com

 mjohnson@schneiderwallace.com

 alee@schneiderwallace.com

James C. Sturdevant, State Bar No. 94551 

Monique Olivier, State Bar No. 190385 

Whitney B. Huston, State Bar No. 234863 

THE STURDEVANT LAW FIRM 

A Professional Corporation 

354 Pine Street, Fourth Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 477-2410 

Facsimile: (415) 477-2420 

Email: jsturdevant@sturdevantlaw.com

molivier@sturdevantlaw.com

 whuston@sturdevantlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IVANA KIROLA, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO (“the CITY”), et al.; 

Defendants 

Case No.: C07-3685 SBA 

CLASS ACTION

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER RE PRODUCTION AND 

CONFIDENTIALITY OF DOCUMENTS 

SUBJECT TO HEALTH & SAFETY 

CODE § 19851 

[Civil L.R. 6-3] 

Courtroom: C, 15th Floor 

Judge: Magistrate Judge 

 Edward M. Chen 

Trial Date: May 24, 2010 

Merits Discovery Cutoff: February 26, 2010 

Expert Discovery Cutoff: March 12, 2010 

Complaint Filed: July 17, 2007 

Case 4:07-cv-03685-SBA Document 155 Filed 02/17/10 Page 1 of 5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE PRODUCTION AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF 

DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 19851 

KIROLA ET AL. V. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET AL., CASE NO. 4:07-CV-03685 SBA (EMC) 

 1 

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

 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs have requested that the City produce certain documents, as specified in 

a January 29, 2010 email from Guy B. Wallace to Elaine O'Neil and which include any permit 

documents and approved plans (particularly the architectural drawings), for certain buildings or 

facilities identified by Plaintiffs with respect to major projects since January 1993 of a valuation of 

$500,000; 

WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code section 19851 places certain restrictions on the 

circumstances under which copies may be made of the official plans provided for under section 

19850 that are required to be maintained by the building department of every city or county for the 

buildings for which the department issues permits; 

WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code section 19851 specifically provides, as relevant 

here, that such plans shall be open for inspection only on the premises of the building department and 

may not be duplicated except (1) with the written permission of the licensed professional who signed 

the original documents and the original or current owner of the building, or (2) by order of a proper 

court; and 

WHEREAS, the City considers it necessary, for security reasons, to provide for the 

confidential treatment and limited reproduction of copies or print outs of plans, schematics, or 

drawings of public buildings; 

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties to this action, 

through their respective counsel, as follows: 

1. The City, through its Department of Building Inspection (“DBI”), will make available to 

Plaintiffs for inspection and copying, all final plans, building permits and as-built drawings for the 

following buildings or facilities with respect to major projects since January 1993 of a valuation of 

$500,000 or more for which Plaintiffs have requested such documents: 

Academy of Sciences 

de Young Museum 

Glen Park Canyon 

Hamilton Playground 

Howard and Langton Mini Park 

Case 4:07-cv-03685-SBA Document 155 Filed 02/17/10 Page 2 of 5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE PRODUCTION AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF 

DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 19851 

KIROLA ET AL. V. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET AL., CASE NO. 4:07-CV-03685 SBA (EMC) 

 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

 

Lessing and Sears Mini Park 

Louis Sutter Playground 

Strybring Arboretum 

Minne and Lovie Ward Recreation Center 

War Memorial Veteran's Building 

2. To the extent that the parties agree or the Court orders that additional documents of the 

same description need to be produced for the following facilities, this Stipulation and Proposed Order 

shall also cover such documents for those facilities: 

101 Grove 

Chinatown Library 

Excelsior Library 

Glen Bark Library 

Main Library 

3. Such documents shall be made available during the regular business hours of DBI , i.e. 

between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. For documents available only on microfilm, DBI will identify and make 

available all reels of 35mm microfilm on which the requested documents are contained. Plaintiffs 

will provide their own microfilm reader, printer, and paper for printing documents from the microfilm 

reader. For documents contained in DBI’s “PaperVision” database, DBI will provide access to a 

computer and the database. DBI will also provide Plaintiffs with the same instructions for using this 

database provided to members of the public who are given access to the database. Documents printed 

from the database will be charged at the ordinary rate for documents requested by subpoena of: 

$5.25 per page for plans (11 x 14) 

$.20 per page for other documents (8.5 x 11) 

Plaintiffs will pay DBI for the costs of printing these documents before they leave the premises 

of DBI. 

4. Plaintiffs agree that they will only copy or print out documents relating to the buildings or 

facilities identified above in paragraph 1. 

Case 4:07-cv-03685-SBA Document 155 Filed 02/17/10 Page 3 of 5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE PRODUCTION AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF 

DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 19851 

KIROLA ET AL. V. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET AL., CASE NO. 4:07-CV-03685 SBA (EMC) 

 3 

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

 

5. The City, through DBI, has gathered the final plans, building permits and as-built drawings 

for each of the following buildings or facilities with respect to major projects since January 1993 of a 

valuation of $500,000 or more for which Plaintiffs have requested such documents, and will make 

these documents available to Plaintiffs for inspection and copying: 

War Memorial Opera House 

Davies Symphony Hall 

Conservatory of Flowers 

Japanese Tea Garden 

Eureka Valley Recreation Center 

Sunnyside Conservatory 

Joseph Lee Recreation Center and Playground 

Sava Pool 

Mission Pool 

5. The official copy of the plans provided for under California Health and Safety Code section 

19850 for any of the buildings or facilities for which Plaintiffs have requested such documents, 

including any official copy of plans that have already been produced to Plaintiffs, may be duplicated 

in whole or in part by Plaintiffs pursuant to this order. By obtaining this order, the City and DBI 

comply with their obligations under California Health and Safety Code section 19851. 

6. Any copies or printouts of plans, schematics, or drawings obtained by Plaintiffs, including 

any plans, schematics, or drawings already gathered and/or produced by DBI, will be treated as 

confidential by Plaintiffs, as follows: 

a. Plaintiffs will maintain control over all such documents and will not provide 

copies to other persons except as is reasonably necessary or appropriate in the 

prosecution of this case. 

b. If Plaintiffs make copies available to their experts, consultants or other 

persons in the course of prosecution of this case they will do so under an 

agreement that requires that those persons return or destroy the documents 

when they no longer require their use for this case. 

Case 4:07-cv-03685-SBA Document 155 Filed 02/17/10 Page 4 of 5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE PRODUCTION AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF 

DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 19851 

KIROLA ET AL. V. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET AL., CASE NO. 4:07-CV-03685 SBA (EMC) 

 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

 

c. Plaintiffs will return or destroy all copies of such documents at the conclusion 

of the case. 

d. Until such time as a protective order is entered, Plaintiffs shall treat any plans 

or schematics produced by the City or obtained from DBI as for “attorneys 

eyes only,” including experts. 

SO STIPULATED, 

Date: February 17, 2010 SCHNEIDER WALLACE 

 COTTRELL BRAYTON 

 KONECKY LLP 

 /s/ Mark T. Johnson 

By: Mark T. Johnson 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

 

 OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 

 By: ______/s/ Danny Chou_________________ 

 Danny Chou 

 Chief of Complex and Special Litigation 

 For Defendant City and County of San Francisco 

ORDER

 Good cause appearing, the parties’ Stipulation is hereby approved. 

IT IS SO ORDERED, 

Dated: February _____, 2010 ___________________________________

 Honorable Edward M. Chen 

 Magistrate Judge 

Case 4:07-cv-03685-SBA Document 155 Filed 02/17/10 Page 5 of 5