McGinnis

McGinnis v. Davis

Bad Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 6, 20213:20-cv-01695California1,297 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 MARCUS G. MCGINNIS, Case No. 20-cv-01695-SI

Plaintiff,

ORDER COMPELLING DISCOVERY

v. AND SETTING SCHEDULE

EARL JONES, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 20 Defendants.

12 This is a pro se prisoner’s civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in which plaintiff claims that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical/dental needs. The matter is now before the court for consideration of defendants’ unopposed motion to compel plaintiff to attend his deposition and answer questions at that deposition. In general, parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is “relevant to any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). Factors to consider include “the importance of the issues at stake in the action, the amount in controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the…

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.