(PC) Hounihan v. Villasenor ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 JASON SCOTT HOUNIHAN, Case No. 1:23-cv-00163-EPG (PC) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO EXCHANGE DOCUMENTS 11 v. 12 JOSE C. VILLASENOR, 13 Defendant(s). 14 15 Jason Scott Hounihan (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 16 pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 17 On July 11, 2023, the Court issued an order requiring the parties to file scheduling and 18 discovery statements. (ECF No. 23). The parties have now filed their statements. (ECF Nos. 19 29, 30).1 20 The Court has reviewed this case and the parties’ statements. In an effort to secure the 21 just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of this action,2 the Court will direct that certain 22 1 The Court notes that Defendant states that Plaintiff has been charged with various crimes, including 23 drug offenses, related to the incident in the complaint, which case remains pending in state court. (ECF No. 30, pp. 3-4). And “Defendant requests this Court to stay any civil proceedings until the conclusion of Plaintiffs criminal 24 case, or, in the alternative, stay the discovery of all crime reports, body worn camera footage, photographs, and other evidence obtained in the fentanyl investigation pertaining to the open and active criminal prosecution of 25 Plaintiff.” (Id. at 7). Noting this request, the Court issued a minute order on August 8, 2023, granting Defendant until August 30, 2023, to file a properly supported motion to stay this case or to limit discovery before the Court 26 schedules the case or orders discovery to proceed. (ECF No. 31). However, Defendant has filed no such motion. 2 See, e.g., United States v. W.R. Grace, 526 F.3d 499, 508-09 (9th Cir. 2008) (“We begin with the 27 principle that the district court is charged with effectuating the speedy and orderly administration of justice. There is universal acceptance in the federal courts that, in carrying out this mandate, a district court has the authority to 28 enter pretrial case management and discovery orders designed to ensure that the relevant issues to be tried are 1 documents that are central to the dispute be promptly produced.3 2 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 3 1. Each party has sixty days from the date of service of this order to serve opposing 4 parties, or their counsel, if represented, with copies of the following documents 5 and/or evidence that they have in their possession, custody, or control, to the 6 extent the parties have not already done so:4 7 a. Jail incident reports related to the allegations in the complaint. 8 b. Witness statements and evidence that were generated from 9 investigation(s) related to the event(s) at issue in the complaint.5 10 c. All of Plaintiff’s medical records related to the incident(s) and/or 11 condition(s) at issue in the case. 12 d. Video recordings and photographs related to the incident(s) at issue in 13 the complaint, including video recordings and photographs of Plaintiff 14 taken following the incident(s).6 15 2. If any party obtains documents and/or other evidence described above later in 16 the case from a third party, that party shall provide all other parties with copies 17 of the documents and/or evidence within thirty days. 18 3. Parties do not need to produce documents or evidence that they have already 19 identified, that the parties have an opportunity to engage in appropriate discovery and that the parties are 20 adequately and timely prepared so that the trial can proceed efficiently and intelligibly.”). 3 Advisory Committee Notes to 1993 Amendment to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding Rule 21 26(a) (“The enumeration in Rule 26(a) of items to be disclosed does not prevent a court from requiring by order or local rule that the parties disclose additional information without a discovery request.”). 22 4 Defense counsel is requested to obtain these documents from Plaintiff’s institution(s) of confinement. If defense counsel is unable to do so, defense counsel should inform Plaintiff that a third party subpoena is required. 23 5 See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 94-95 (2006) (“[P]roper exhaustion improves the quality of those prisoner suits that are eventually filed because proper exhaustion often results in the creation of an administrative 24 record that is helpful to the court. When a grievance is filed shortly after the event giving rise to the grievance, witnesses can be identified and questioned while memories are still fresh, and evidence can be gathered and 25 preserved.”). The Court notes that Defendant(s) only need to produce documents such as a Confidential Appeal Inquiry 26 or a Use of Force Critique to the extent those documents contain witness statements related to the incident(s) alleged in the complaint and/or evidence related to the incident(s) alleged in the complaint that will not be 27 provided to Plaintiff separately. 6 If Plaintiff is not allowed possess, or is unable to play, video recording(s), defense counsel shall work 28 with staff at Plaintiff’s institution of confinement to ensure that Plaintiff is able to view the video recording(s). 1 produced. 2 4. Parties do not need to produce documents or evidence that were provided to 3 them by the opposing party. 4 5. Parties may object to producing any of the above-listed documents and/or 5 evidence. Objections shall be filed with the Court and served on all other parties 6 within sixty days from the date of service of this order (or within thirty days of 7 receiving additional documents and/or evidence). The objection should include 8 the basis for not providing the documents and/or evidence. If Defendant(s) 9 object based on the official information privilege, Defendant(s) shall follow the 10 procedures described in the Court’s scheduling order. Ifa party files an 11 objection, all other parties have fourteen days from the date the objection is filed 12 to file a response. If any party files a response to an objection, the Court will 13 issue a ruling on the objection. 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 || Dated: _ September 7, 2023 [Jee Sy — 17 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28