From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kozacenko v. Murrill

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Mar 13, 2015
2:12-cv-2196 MCE DAD (E.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2015)

Opinion


OLEGS KOZACENKO, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL OFFICER ANDREW P. MURRILL, et al., Defendants. No. 2:12-cv-2196 MCE DAD United States District Court, E.D. California. March 13, 2015

          ORDER

          DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.

         This matter came before the court on March 6, 2015, for hearing of defendants' motion to compel physical and mental examination and plaintiff's motion to compel responses to deposition questions. Attorneys David Wiechert and Jessica Munk appeared telephonically on behalf of the plaintiff and attorneys Alberto Gonzalez and Neli Palma appeared on behalf of the defendants.

         Upon consideration of the arguments on file and at the hearing, and for the reasons set forth on the record at the hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' motion to compel (Dkt. No. 64) is granted as stated on the record; and

2. Plaintiff's motion to compel (Dkt. No. 65) is granted as stated on the record.


Summaries of

Kozacenko v. Murrill

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Mar 13, 2015
2:12-cv-2196 MCE DAD (E.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2015)
Case details for

Kozacenko v. Murrill

Case Details

Full title:OLEGS KOZACENKO, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL OFFICER ANDREW P…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Mar 13, 2015

Citations

2:12-cv-2196 MCE DAD (E.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2015)