IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 4, 2008
HIPOLITO M. CHACOAN, PLAINTIFF,
DR. ROHRER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
On July 24, 2008, a hearing was held regarding plaintiff's motion for discovery filed June 20, 2008. Edward Sangster appeared on behalf of plaintiff. Stephen Pass appeared on behalf of defendant.
Plaintiff seeks permission to serve defendants with one set of interrogatories and a second request for production of documents. Plaintiff also seeks permission to conduct four depositions. The interrogatories ask defendants to identify the persons in plaintiff's medical records identified as "TL" or "TJ" and "S. Mann" or "S. Marr." Plaintiff also asks defendants to state all facts and identify each writing or recording that supports any contention that plaintiff suffered his hearing loss before his incarceration at CSP-Solano.
Defendants do not object to the interrogatories seeking the identities of "TL" or "TJ" and "S. Mann" or "S. Marr." The court finds that the good cause exists for the interrogatories seeking information regarding whether plaintiff suffered his hearing loss before his incarceration at CSP-Solano. The court also finds good cause exists for the documents sought in the request for production of documents.
Defendants do not object to plaintiff's request to depose defendant Traquina. Defendants object to the request to depose defendant Dr. Thor. Defendants state that defendant Thor has been retired for over two years and, as such, does not have direct access to staff or records at CSP-Solano. The court finds that plaintiff has not presently shown good cause to depose defendant Thor.
Plaintiff also seeks to depose the persons identified as "TL" or "TJ" and "S. Mann" or "S. Marr." Plaintiff states that his medical records show that on July 24, 2003, "TL" authorized his ear surgery. The surgery was not performed for another 21 months. Plaintiff states that his medical records show that during this time, his surgery was recommended five other times and that "TL" repeatedly authorized the surgery. The court finds that plaintiff has shown good cause to depose "TL."
Plaintiff claims that in November 2004, defendant Rallos recommended that plaintiff see a specialist at the University of California Medical Center "asap." Plaintiff claims that "S. Marr" approved the request on November 23, 2004, but it took three months before plaintiff was seen by the specialist. The court finds that plaintiff has shown good cause to depose "S. Marr."
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's June 20, 2008, motion for discovery is granted but for the request to depose defendant Thor; plaintiff shall conduct this discovery within 90 days of the date of this order;
2. Plaintiff's amended complaint is due within 120 days of the date of this order; at that time, the court will issue a scheduling order.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.