From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Denton v. Rainer

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jan 31, 2023
C19-5743 BHS (W.D. Wash. Jan. 31, 2023)

Opinion

C19-5743 BHS

01-31-2023

MICHAEL DENTON, Plaintiff, v. KARIE RAINER, Defendant.


ORDER

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE, United States District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on the parties' cross motions to allow witnesses to testify via Zoom at the upcoming hearing on Plaintiff Michael Denton's motion for a preliminary injunction, Dkts. 183, 185, and the parties' Joint Pre-Hearing Report, Dkt. 193.

In its previous order, the Court ordered Denton to provide a summary of the testimony that he expects will be provided through the four incarcerated individuals. Dkt. 191 at 3. He did not do so. He also added a fifth incarcerated individual to his witness list. See Dkt. 193 at 2. Together, the parties list eighteen “anticipated” witnesses for the scheduled two-day hearing.

The Court currently has insufficient information to proceed. The parties must provide a summary of what witnesses are expected to testify about. To the extent any witnesses have overlapping testimony, the parties must explain whether more than one witness is necessary to provide the duplicative testimony as well as which witness(es) the party would like to prioritize in the event the Court determines the testimony is redundant. This includes, but is not limited to, an explanation of the difference in testimony of the five incarcerated individuals, and an explanation of what information Cheryl Strange can provide that will not be covered by other witnesses. Moreover, Denton must provide to the Court the DOC number of the additional incarcerated witness, James Williams, if he expects him to be available to testify via Zoom. To the extent the parties have a general understanding of the length of each witness's testimony, that information would also benefit the Court.

To coordinate a hybrid hearing such as this, particularly one where a number of the witnesses expected to testify are incarcerated, the Court must coordinate with administrative staff as well as the DOC. The Court needs to provide information to DOC about when incarcerated individuals are expected to testify and for how long. Moreover, given the sheer number of witnesses listed, the Court needs to assess whether a two-day hearing will be sufficient and needs to provide notice to administrative staff about when the Court will need to utilize Zoom.

The parties also indicated that they are expecting the Court to consider documents that have already been submitted. Any documents that the parties intend the Court to consider in its decision should be listed in the amended pre-hearing report and should be offered into evidence at the hearing.

The parties are ORDERED to submit an amended joint pre-hearing report containing the above information by Wednesday, February 1, 2023, at 12:00 PM.


Summaries of

Denton v. Rainer

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jan 31, 2023
C19-5743 BHS (W.D. Wash. Jan. 31, 2023)
Case details for

Denton v. Rainer

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL DENTON, Plaintiff, v. KARIE RAINER, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Jan 31, 2023

Citations

C19-5743 BHS (W.D. Wash. Jan. 31, 2023)