Summary
finding that an inmate qualifies as an invitee, and not a licensee, as "[t]he definition of a licensee . . . presupposes an element of volition in the person's presence on the land. Yet it appears safe to assume that plaintiff was not in the jail voluntarily"
Summary of this case from Rodriguez-Aguirre v. United StatesOpinion
Civil Action No. 10-cv-01329-REB-BNB.
May 5, 2011
ORDER
This matter arises on defendant's Motion for Protective Order [Doc. # 39, filed 4/22/2011] (the "Motion for Protective Order"). I held a hearing on the Motion for Protective Order this morning and made rulings on the record, which are incorporated here. For the reasons stated on the record,
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Protective Order [Doc. # 39] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
• GRANTED to preclude inquiry by the plaintiff into the categories listed as Nos. 3, 4, 7, 11, 13, and 14 in the plaintiff's Rule 30(b)(6) Notice of Deposition; and
• DENIED in all other respects.