Puckett
Puckett v. County of Sacramento
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 JEREMY PHILLIP PUCKETT, No. 2:22-cv-0350 KJM DB 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER 15 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 On December 8, 2023, plaintiff filed a motion to compel and noticed if for hearing before 19 the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(1). (ECF No. 56.) On March 20, 2024, the 20 undersigned issued an order sanctioning defense counsel $500 for refusing to meet and confer 21 with respect to a separate motion to compel because that conduct violates both the Local Rules 22 and the undersigned’s Standard Information. (ECF No. 119.) 23 On March 22, 2024, the parties filed a Joint Statement re Discovery Dispute pursuant to 24 Local Rule 251 in connection with plaintiff’s motion to compel filed on December 8, 2023. (ECF 25 No. 128.) The Joint Statement reflected that defendants provided plaintiff with amended 26 responses “at 7:08 p.m. the evening before [the] Joint Statement was due.” (Id. at 6.) On March 27 26, 2024, the…