Hargrove

Hargrove v. City of Bakersfield

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 7, 20191:17-cv-01743California1,430 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TATYANA HARGROVE, ) Case No.: 1:17-cv-1743 JLT ) Plaintiffs, ) ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO ) SUBSTITUTE A WITNESS v. ) ) (Doc. 48) CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, et al., ) Defendants. ) )

The defense seeks to substitute Joseph Mullins (one of the 30(b)(6) witnesses) for another, Evan Demestihas. (Doc. 48) Because it is immaterial who provides the testimony of the entity, given the fact that the City’s testimony has been taken previously, there is no prejudice to allowing the defense to substitute these witnesses and the motion is GRANTED. I. Background The plaintiff sought to take the deposition of the entity and, toward this end, issued a deposition notice and 27 topics upon which she would examine the City. In response, the City produced three witnesses: Joseph Mullins, Brent Stratton and Evan Demestihas. Each submitted to deposition and gave testimony on behalf of the entity. After those depositions, Lyle Martin…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.