Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01271/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01271-17/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Nicholas Hart
Plaintiff
Kenneth Hockett
Defendant
Darlene Hutchins
Defendant
Brian Machado
Defendant
Benjamin C. Oyarzo
Plaintiff
Toney Powers
Defendant
Tuolumne Fire District
Defendant
Tuolumne Fire Protection District
Defendant
Joseph Turner
Defendant

Document Text:

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BENJAMIN C. OYARZO and NICHOLAS HART,

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

TUOLUMNE FIRE DISTRICT (A.K.A. “TUOLUMNE 

FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT”), JOSEPH TURNER, 

in his individual and official capacities, DARLENE 

HUTCHINS, in her individual and official capacities, 

KENNETH HOCKETT, in his individual and official 

capacities, BRIAN MACHADO, in his individual and 

official capacities, TONEY POWERS, in his individual and 

official capacities, and DOES 1 THROUGH 20, Inclusive

 Defendants.

1:11-CV-01271 LJO SAB

ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’ 

OBJECTIONS TO 

EVIDENCE (Doc. 105)

Yesterday, the Court issued a comprehensive Memorandum Decision and Order 

addressing six defense motions for summary judgment. (Doc. 107.) The final reply in connection with 

those motions was filed May 31, 2013. (Doc. 95.) On July 1, 2013, Plaintiffs filed objections to evidence 

submitted by Defendants in connection with their motions. (Doc. 105.) Plaintiffs failed to warn the 

Court that it planned to file further objections and offered no explanation for the fact that the objections 

were filed more than a month after the final reply was due.1The Court would be well justified in 

refusing to consider the objections. However, in an abundance of caution, the Court has reviewed the 

objections and finds that they would not change the reasoning or outcome of the July 1, 2013 

Memorandum Decision and Order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 2, 2013 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

b2e55c0d

 

1 The Court requested supplemental briefing on two issues. The final brief in response to those requests was filed June 20, 

2013, but none of the responses thereto presented additional evidence that would have justified late-filed objections. 

Case 1:11-cv-01271-SAB Document 108 Filed 07/02/13 Page 1 of 1