From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

S.T. v. L. A. Unified Sch. Dist.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Dec 2, 2021
CV 19-6693-GW-SKx (C.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2021)

Opinion

CV 19-6693-GW-SKx

12-02-2021

S.T., a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem, N.T.; and N.T., as an individual Plaintiff, v. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND DOES 1-10 inclusive, Defendants.

Shawna L. Parks (SBN 208301) LAW OFFICE OF SHAWNA L. PARKS Surisa E. Rivers (SBN 250868) RIVERS LAW, INC., APC Attorneys for Plaintiff Michele M. Goldsmith (SBN 178222) Matthew R. Hicks (SBN 191772) BERGMAN DACEY GOLDSMITH Attorneys for Defendant, LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT


Shawna L. Parks (SBN 208301) LAW OFFICE OF SHAWNA L. PARKS Surisa E. Rivers (SBN 250868) RIVERS LAW, INC., APC Attorneys for Plaintiff

Michele M. Goldsmith (SBN 178222) Matthew R. Hicks (SBN 191772) BERGMAN DACEY GOLDSMITH Attorneys for Defendant, LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

PROTECTIVE ORDER - SPECIFIC TO IDENTITIES OF PERSONS WHO REPORTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES

HON. GEORGE H. WU, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Protective Order

On November 29, 2021, this Court ruled that Defendant Los Angeles Unified School District must disclose the identity of any school employees who made any of the reports to the Department of Children and Family Services at issue in this case. However, this Court also indicated that it would order such disclosure only after an appropriate protective order was in place in this action regarding these identities.

Therefore, this Court issues the following protective order:

1. The parties and their respective counsel, including employees of counsels' offices, will keep these names confidential, and will only use the identities of the parties as necessary for purposes of this litigation. These names are not to be disclosed by the parties to anyone outside of this litigation, including after the case is concluded.

2. The jury will be instructed at the beginning and end of trial that the identities of the reporting party(ies) are to be treated as confidential and are not to be disclosed outside of the courtroom, including after their service on the jury has concluded.

3. To the extent any documents are filed containing the name of the reporting party(ies) such documents will be filed with the names redacted, or under seal if the document is such that redaction is not practical.

4. If there are any individuals in the courtroom observing trial proceedings, the Court will make an announcement at the beginning of each session that the names of any reporting party(ies) identified during trial are confidential and may not be disclosed outside of the courtroom.

5. [Defendant's addition: In order to track who is in attendance each day of Court and therefore subject to the Protective Order, the Court will have a log in sheet each day for each attendee to sign, and which will attach this Protective Order.

6. A violation of this Protective Order will have the same force and effect as if it was a violation of any Court Order, including contempt of Court.]

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

S.T. v. L. A. Unified Sch. Dist.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Dec 2, 2021
CV 19-6693-GW-SKx (C.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2021)
Case details for

S.T. v. L. A. Unified Sch. Dist.

Case Details

Full title:S.T., a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem, N.T.; and N.T., as an…

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Dec 2, 2021

Citations

CV 19-6693-GW-SKx (C.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2021)