Docstoc

88 Supplemental Declaration re Inability to File Stip

Document Sample
88 Supplemental Declaration re Inability to File Stip Powered By Docstoc
					Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 88

Filed 01/24/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5

Mark A. Wasser CA SB # 60160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1100 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 E-mail: mwasser(wmarkwasse1..com

Bernard C. Barmann, S1'. KERJ-J COUNTY COUNSEL 6 Mark Nations, Chief Deputy 1115 Truxton Avenue. Fourth Floor 7 Bakersfield, CA 93301 ,Phone: (661) 868-3800 8 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: mrlatlom;@2o.]kern.ca. 9
I'

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
VS.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
i

II DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
Plaintiff,

) Case No.: l:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG )

) SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF ) MARK A. WASSER RE: INABILITY TO ) FILE STIPULATION FOLLOWING

et Defendants.

) ) )

) Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 ) Trial Date: December 3, 2008
) )

~-----------)
I, Mark A. Wasser, declare as follows:
I.
2.

This continuing discovery dispute is exasperating. Defendants are not trying to "narrow Plaintiffs requests for production beyond

what had been agreed." In this regard, Defendants even accepted Plaintiff s proposed change to Paragraph 1 of the draft stipulation to clarify this point. (See, Exhibits C and D to Wasser Declaration of January 23, 2008.) Plaintiff admits, in the Declaration that Eugene Lee filed on
I
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARA nON OF MARK A. WASSER RE: INABILITY TO FILE STIPULAnON FOLLOWING DISCOVERY HEARING

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 88

Filed 01/24/2008

Page 2 of 2

January 23, 2008, that "there does not at the moment appear to be any dispute between the 2
~

parties regarding actual production ...".

Defendants are at a loss to understand why Plaintiff

"

continues to resist even the most straightforward agreements. 3. Defendants have agreed to produce the personnel file of Dr. Royce Johnson.

4

5
6 7
8 9 10

Defendants are produeing it subject to their objections in order to preserve the right to assert the objections later. the January 14, 2008 hearing, Defendants withdrew objections to the
to

production of many documents but not the personnel

It is being produced subject

the
. it \'/i11

be impossible to resolve subject to

objections. Neither If Plaintiff is

is prejudiced by production of the Dr. Joblnsc)fi
IS

to estahlish
~fl!]reSSf"l

a COlnparator " as he

II

obliectiorlS can be
4.

, 1
13

I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed 24th day of January, 2008, Sacramento, California.

14 IS 16
17 18 19

lsi Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al.

20 21
22

23 24
25

26
27

28 2
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF MARK A WASSER RE: INABILITY TO FILE STIPULATION FOLLOWING DISCOVERY HEARING


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: David F. Jadwin v. Kern County: 1:07-cv-26 in the United Stated District Court for the Eastern District of California, Fresno Division before Judge Oliver W. Wanger. This was a 2009 federal employment lawsuit that went to a bench and jury trial resulting in a unanimous verdict and significant judgment for the plaintiff employee. Issues involved violations of medical leave and disability discrimination laws, as well as 42 U.S.C. 1983 procedural due process violation. Plaintiff was represented by Eugene Lee, a Los Angeles, California employment lawyer.