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.

Arthur Carr v. H. Her

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


March 26, 2013

ARTHUR CARR, PLAINTIFF,
v.
H. HER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

On November 20, 2012, the undersigned issued the pretrial order. On February 25, 2013, plaintiff filed an untimely motion for modification of the pretrial order, and a motion for reconsideration of the pretrial order, claiming that he inadvertently omitted exhibits from the exhibit list contained in the pretrial order. Defendants have not filed an opposition.

At the January 14, 2013 trial confirmation hearing, jury trial was continued to July 9, 2013.

Plaintiff claims he wishes to amend the exhibit list exchanged at the trial confirmation hearing, for a total of 36 exhibits. (Dkt. No. 212 at 3.) However, if the court added the items numbered 1 through 14 listed in the motion for modification, to the 19 exhibits listed in the pretrial order, the number of exhibits does not total 36. The motion is similarly confusing because plaintiff included a separate list of exhibits after his conclusion, marked "Notes," which lists eight exhibits, some of which are included in the pretrial order, and some of which are not. (Dkt. No. 212 at 7.) It appears that plaintiff wishes to add his exhibits numbered 37 - 43, but adding seven exhibits to the 19 listed, also does not total 36. Before the court can determine whether plaintiff should be allowed to amend his exhibit list, the court must have one, complete exhibit list to present to the district court, which the court and the parties will use at trial. This list must be a simple description of the item, without explanation of how it was previously filed with the court, or why plaintiff now seeks to have it admitted. Plaintiff may, if he wishes, include a parenthetical number referencing plaintiff's prior numbering sequence, for example, "(PX 23)."*fn1 But plaintiff should retain the numbering sequence set forth in the pretrial order.

To assist plaintiff in this regard, the undersigned appended the exhibit list and list of discovery documents from the pretrial order to this order. Plaintiff should simply cross out any items he does not wish to admit (if any), and insert items he now wishes to add. Plaintiff should follow the identification pattern used by the court.

Plaintiff does not need to file copies of the exhibits. No further argument or explanation is required. Once plaintiff files the complete lists, defendants are granted seven days in which to file an opposition, if any, to plaintiff's motion to amend his exhibit list.

Finally, on February 26, 2013, plaintiff filed a request for clarification as to whether he is allowed to subpoena both Michael Soares and Dr. A. Traquina as witnesses for trial. As noted in the pretrial order, both Michael Soares and Dr. Traquina are listed as witnesses for plaintiff. Therefore, plaintiff is entitled to subpoena both witnesses, which is why the court clerk issued plaintiff two subpoena forms.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the attached notice of submission of documents form, along with the attached exhibit list and list of discovery documents, and file it with the court; and

2. Seven days thereafter, defendants may file objections, if any, to plaintiff's motion to amend his exhibit list.

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

No. 2:09-cv-0826 GEB KJN P

ARTHUR CARR, Plaintiff, v. H. HER, et al., Defendants.

NOTICE OF SUBMISSION / OF DOCUMENTS

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's order filed .

Proposed Amended Exhibit List

Proposed Amended List of Discovery Documents DATED:

Plaintiff Proposed Amended Exhibits, Schedules and Summaries

Plaintiff anticipates offering:

1. Transcript from the January 26, 2009 preliminary hearing in People v. Carroll and Sprague, Case Nos. FCR 256079 & FCR 256080 (Solano County);*fn2

2. Twenty-three color photographs taken on March 10, 2008, of the scene of the incident, as well as of the injuries sustained during the incident;*fn3

3. January 20, 2010 Mental Health Interdisciplinary Progress Notes/CDCR-7230 MH;

4. August 25, 2009 Interdisciplinary Progress Notes/CDCR-7230 MH;

5. July 29, 2009 Interdisciplinary Progress Notes/CDCR-7230 MH;

6. May 4, 9 and 21, 2009 Interdisciplinary Progress Notes/CDCR-7230 MH and Group Therapy Note;

7. April 15, 2009 Interdisciplinary Progress Notes/CDCR-7230 MH;

8. March 2, 2009 Interdisciplinary Progress Notes/CDCR-7230 MH;

9. February 18, 2009 Interdisciplinary Progress Notes/CDCR-7230 MH;

10. May 15, 2009 Suicide Risk Assessment CDCR-7447;

11. July 21, 2008 - July 25, 2008 (reverse page) and July 26, 2008 - July 27, 2008 Mental Health Interdisciplinary Progress Notes/CDC form MH 3; (PX 11)

12. Mental Health Treatment Plan CDCR-7388; (PX 37) (dated 5/22/09)

13. December 13, 2009 Mental Health Treatment Plan CDCR-7388;

14. March 21, 2008 Suicide Risk Assessment Checklist/CDCR 7447;

15. March 21, 2008 Interdisciplinary Progress Notes / CDC-7230;*fn4

16. CDC-115 Rules Violation Report, Log number S2-08-03-0719, dated March 10, 2008; (PX 16) (Exhibit C - Dkt. No. 212 at 15.)

17. CDC-115 Rules Violation Report, Log number S2-08-03-0720 dated March 10, 2008;*fn5 (PX 17) (Exhibit D - Dkt. No. 212 at 23.)

18. Crime/Incident Report Part C2 - Review Notice -- CDCR 837-C2 form (Rev 10/06);

19. Crime/Incident Report Part C1-Supplement - CDCR 837-C1 (Rev. 10/06).*fn6

Proposed Amended Discovery Documents

Plaintiff anticipates the use of the following:

1. Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions, dated March 15, 2010;

2. Defendant Solorzano's Responses to Plaintiff's Request for Admissions, Set One, dated April 27, 2010; (PX 23) (Exhibit B - Dkt. No. 212 at 13)

3. Defendant Her's Responses to plaintiff's Request for Admissions, Set One, dated April 27, 2010; (PX 24); (Exhibit A - Dkt. No. 212 at 9)

4. Plaintiff's First Request for Production of Documents, dated March 8, 2010;

5. Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's First Request for Production of Documents, dated April 21, 2010;

6. Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories to defendants, dated March 5, 2010;

7. Defendant Solorzano's Response to plaintiff's Request for Interrogatories, Set One, dated April 27, 2010;

8. Defendant Her's Response to plaintiff's Request for Interrogatories, Set One, dated April 27, 2010;

9. Plaintiff's Supplemental Request for Interrogatories dated August 31, 2010;

10. Responses to plaintiff's August 31, 2010 Supplemental Request for Interrogatories;*fn7

11. Plaintiff's Second Request for Admissions to defendant Solorzano dated November 4, 2010, page two;

12. Defendant Solorzano's Responses to plaintiff's Request for Admissions, Set Two, specifically his responses to requests numbers 1 and 3;

13. Plaintiff's May 18, 2010 deposition transcript; and

14. Defendant Her's Responses to plaintiff's Request for Admissions, Set Two, specifically response number 6.*fn8


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.