Asman

(PS) Schmitz v. Asman

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 16, 20242:20-cv-00195California4,003 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THOMAS SCHMITZ, et al,, No. 2:20-cv-00195-DJC-CKD (PS) Plaintiffs, v. ORDER ADAM ASMAN, et al., Defendants.

17 Plaintiffs, Dianne Mallia and Thomas Schmitz, proceed without counsel under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The motion presently before the court is filed by defendants Adams, Andaluz, Ashe, Asman, Branman, Brizendine, Brockenborogh, Ceballos, Heatley, J. Johnson, R. Johnson, Ponciano, Ramkumar, Rekart, Robinson, Rudas, M. Smith, C. Smith, Tebrock, Toche, and Waine. The moving defendants request a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) limiting the scope of the third-party subpoena issued to Dr. Michael Golding. (ECF No. 323.) The motion for a protective order is granted in part and denied in part, as set forth below. I. Background This action arises from the January 2019 death of William Schmitz (“William”), during his incarceration at Mule Creek State Prison (“MCSP”), under the authority of…

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.