Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Holdridge v. Blank

United States District Court, D. Colorado

March 9, 2016

BENJAMIN HOLDRIDGE, Plaintiff,
v.
ROSS BLANK, BRENDAN DIGEORGE, SCOTT MIDDLETON, JEFFERY MALCHOW, JOHN DOES 1-10, and CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, COLORADO; Defendants.

Eric M. Ziporin Senter Goldfarb & Rice, L.L.C. Counsel for Defendants Malchow, Middleton, and City of Steamboat Springs

Skippere Spear Office of the Colorado Attorney General Ralph L. Carr Colorado Judicial Center Counsel for Brendan DiGeorge

Cathy Havener Greer Wells Anderson & Race, LLC Counsel for Ross Blank

Clark Davidson Oliphant & Bursek, L.L.C. Counsel for Plaintiff

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

R. Brooke Jackson United States District Court Judge

Each party and each Counsel of Record stipulate and move the Court for a Protective Order pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning the treatment of Confidential Information (as hereinafter defined) and, as grounds therefore, state as follows:

1. The parties have reviewed this Court’s judicial practice standards with respect to Protective Orders. This Protective Order generally governs how “confidential” information will be treated by the parties through the course of discovery. The parties agree that if truly “confidential” information must be filed with the Court, the information will be redacted. If the Court must review “confidential” information, the party submitting same will request a narrow order restricting public access and show good cause.

2. In this action, at least one of the Parties will produce or has sought and/or may seek Confidential Information (as defined in paragraph 3 below). The Parties also anticipate seeking additional Confidential Information during discovery and that there will be questioning concerning Confidential Information in the course of depositions. The Parties assert the disclosure of such information outside the scope of this litigation could result in significant injury to one or more of the Parties’ security, safety, or privacy interests. The Parties have entered into this Stipulation and request the Court enter the within Protective Order for the purpose of preventing the disclosure and use of Confidential Information except as set forth herein.

3. “Confidential Information” means any document, file, portions of files, transcribed testimony, or response to a discovery request, including any extract, abstract, chart, summary, note, or copy made therefrom - not made available to the public - and designated by one of the Parties in the manner provided in paragraph 4 below as containing Confidential Information, including, but not limited to:

a. Individual Defendants’ personnel documents.
b. Law enforcement Professional Standard/Internal Affairs investigations.
c. Plaintiff’s medical records.

4. Where Confidential Information is produced, provided or otherwise disclosed by the Parties in response to any discovery request, it will ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.