Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lara v. City of Sacramento

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 3, 2010

JAIME LARA, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CITY OF SACRAMENTO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows U.S. Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff has filed an ex parte motion for order shortening time in which to hear plaintiff's motion to compel deposition testimony of defendant Piano. After hearing argument from both parties by informal telephone conference on September 1, 2010, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion to shorten time, filed September 2, 2010, (dkt. # 26), is granted.

2. The hearing on the motion to compel, (dkt. # 25), is scheduled for September 9, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom #9.

3. Plaintiff shall file a transcript of the deposition by September 7, 2010. 4. Defendant Piano shall file an opposition to the motion to compel by September 7, 2010. Defendant Piano shall submit any documents for in camera review which would show that the reasons for Piano's resignation had no relation to the issues in this case, or Piano's credibility as a witness. See United States v. O'Neill, 619 F.2d 222, 227 (3rd Cir. 1980) (finding that party asserting privilege has the burden to establish that it applies).

20100903

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.