Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01025/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01025-6/pdf.json

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

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DRAKE JONES,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-1025 WBS DAD

v.

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO,

ET AL.

Defendant. ORDER

 /

This case came before the court on March 26, 2010, for hearing on plaintiff’s 

February 26, 2010 motions to compel further deposition testimony (Doc. Nos. 47, 48 and 49). 

Stewart Katz, Esq. appeared for plaintiff. John A. Lavra, Esq. appeared for defendant. 

For the reasons stated on the record at the hearing, plaintiff’s motions to compel

(Doc. Nos. 47, 48 and 49) were granted in part. The depositions in question were ordered

reopened for the limited purpose of obtaining the deponents’ responses to the questions as

framed and limited by the court on the record. With respect to discovery of the personal net

worth of the individual defendants as it relates to the potential of a punitive damages award, an

agreement was reached on the record as to how to preserve such information pursuant to the 

/////

/////

1

Case 2:09-cv-01025-DAD Document 63 Filed 04/01/10 Page 1 of 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

2

terms of the protective order in this case should there remain the potential for a punitive damages

award after all law and motion in the case has been resolved by the assigned district judge.

 IT IS ORDERED.

DATED: April 1, 2010.

Ddad1/orders.civil/jones1025.oah.mtc.032610

Case 2:09-cv-01025-DAD Document 63 Filed 04/01/10 Page 2 of 2