Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Valenzuela v. City of Anaheim

United States District Court, C.D. California

May 9, 2017

FERMIN VINCENT VALENZUELA, Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF ANAHEIM; ANAHEIM POLICE DEPARTMENT; RAUL QUEZADA, individually and as Chief of Police; DANIEL WOLFE, WOOJIM JUN and DOES 1 through 10, individually and as a peace officers, inclusive, Defendants.

          Anaheim City Attorney's Office Moses W. Johnson, IV Assistant City Attorney

          Attorneys for Defendants City of Anaheim, City of Anaheim erroneously sued as Anaheim Police Department; Raul Quezada; Daniel Wolfe; and Woojin Jun

          PROTECTIVE ORDER RE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

          HON. DOUGLAS F. MCCORMICK United States Magistrate Judge.

         On or about May 5, 2017, the parties stipulated to a protective order regarding confidential information and seek to have a protective order entered by the Court based on that stipulation. The stipulation has been filed with the Court. Based on that Stipulation and it appearing that the information is confidential and good cause appearing therefor, the following Protective Order shall apply to any Documents produced by Defendants to Plaintiff's counsel in this action:

         1. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT:

         This action involves information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential materials and information consist of, among other things, the Orange County District Attorney's Office In-Custody Death Investigation and the City of Anaheim Police Department's investigation and Body Worn Camera videos (including information implicating privacy rights of third parties), information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter.

         2. Attorneys for the Plaintiff shall receive from the Defendants a copy of the Orange County District Attorney Office's In Custody Death Investigation and Anaheim Police Department police and investigative reports and Body Worn Camera videos in connection with the investigation of decedent Fermin Valenzuela (“File”).

         3. Attorneys for the Plaintiff shall personally secure and maintain the File in their possession to the end that the File is to be used only for the purposes set forth below and for no other purpose.

         4. Plaintiff's counsel's copy of the investigation File shall only be used for preparing for and prosecuting this case pending the completion of the judicial process including appeal, if any. No copies of the File shall be made.

         5. If necessary in the judgment of the attorneys for the Plaintiff in this case, they may show or reveal the contents of the File to their experts and/or investigators, if the same may actively assist in the prosecution of this case.

         6. Duration: Once a case proceeds to trial, all of the information that was designated as confidential or maintained pursuant to this protective order becomes public unless compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings to proceed otherwise are made to the trial judge in advance of the trial. Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu (9th Cir. 2006) 447 F.3d 1172, 1180-1181 (distinguishing "good cause" showing for sealing documents produced in discovery from "compelling reasons" standard when merits-related documents are part of court record). Accordingly, the terms of this protective order do not extend beyond the commencement of the trial.

         7. Final Disposition: After the final disposition of this Action, Plaintiff's Counsel shall return all Protected Material and/or Confidential Information to counsel for the City or shall destroy such material, including all copies and extracts thereof, abstracts, compilations, summaries, and any other format reproducing or capturing any of the Protected Material and/or Confidential Information with the exception of those documents affected by the attorney work-product doctrine or attorney-client privilege. Notwithstanding this provision, Counsel are entitled to retain an archival copy of all pleadings, motion papers, trial, deposition, and hearing transcripts, legal memoranda, correspondence, deposition and trial exhibits, expert reports, attorney work product, and consultant and expert work product, even if such materials contain material Protected Material and/or Confidential Information produced subject to this order. Any such archival copies that contain or constitute Protected Material and/or Confidential Information remain subject to this Protective Order.

         8. Attorneys for the Plaintiff shall cause the substance of this order to be communicated to each person to whom the File is revealed in accordance with this order and prior to disclosure of the Confidential Information, have such person execute a written Understanding and Agreement to be bound by this Stipulation for Protective Order in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

         9. The attorneys for the Plaintiff shall not cause or knowingly permit disclosure of the contents of the File beyond the disclosure permitted under the terms and conditions of this order, including but not limited to any news ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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