Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

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.

Thomas v. Dade

United States District Court, D. Nevada

January 6, 2020

DESHUN THOMAS, individually, and as Natural Parent and Guardian for L.J., and KRISTIN WOODS as Co-Guardian Ad Litem for L.J., Plaintiffs,
BEVERLY DADE, individually, and in her official capacity; RICHARD FULLER, individually, and in his official capacity; PATRICIA SCHULTZ, individually, and in her official capacity; PAT SKORKOWSKY, individually, and in his official capacity; CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, a Political Subdivision of the State of Nevada, DOE TEACHER'S AIDE, in his/her official capacity; DOES I through X, inclusive; and ROES I though X, inclusive, Defendants.

          GANZ & HAUF Marjorie Hauf, Esq., Cara M. Xidis, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiffs

          CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL Crystal J. Herrera Attorney for Defendants



         Pursuant to the Stipulation contained herein by and among counsel for Plaintiffs Deshun Thomas, individually, and as Natural Parent and Guardian for L.J., and Kristin Woods as Co-Guardian Ad Litem for L.J. (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), and counsel for Defendants Clark County School District (“School District”), Richard Fuller, Beverly Dade, and Patricia Schultz (collectively, “Defendants”), the Court hereby finds as follows:


         Disclosure and discovery activity in this action are likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery, or any categories of information not specifically addressed herein, and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles, and designated “confidential” as described herein. The parties further acknowledge, as set forth further below, that this Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal or otherwise change Federal or Local rules, procedures, and standards to be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal.

         1. The “Litigation” shall mean the above-captioned case, filed in the United States District Court, District of Nevada Case No. 2:19-cv-01019-JAD-BNW

         2. “Documents” or “Information” shall mean and include any documents or portions thereof, or information extracted therefrom, (whether in hard copy or electronic form), records, correspondence, analyses, assessments, statements (financial or otherwise), responses to discovery, tangible articles or things, whether documentary or oral, and other information provided, served, disclosed, filed, or produced, whether voluntarily or through discovery or other means, in connection with this Litigation.

         3. “Party” (or “Parties”) shall mean one party (or all parties) in this Litigation, including by and through their counsel of record. “Producing Party” shall mean any person or entity who provides, serves, discloses, files, or produces any Documents or Information. “Receiving Party” shall mean any person or entity who receives any such Documents or Information.

         4. Any Party may designate any document, object, file, photograph, video, tangible thing, interrogatory answers, answers to requests for admissions, testimony, or other material or copies thereof (collectively, the “Discovery Material”) as “Confidential Information” following a good faith determination that the information so designated is or may reveal confidential, or proprietary matters.

         5. The privacy of students who are not parties to the Litigation is protected under federal law and as a school district that receives federal funding, the School District is bound by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (“FERPA”) and is not at liberty to disclose certain personally identifying information of its students without written consent or court order. The Parties acknowledge that information that could reasonably likely to lead to admissible evidence in this Litigation could contain information that is protected by FERPA. If any Party requests documents or other evidence that are subject to FERPA, the Parties acknowledge that a Court order requiring such a disclosure must first be obtained. If such a court order is granted, and disclosure of FERPA protected information is required, the Parties acknowledge FERPA protected information will be marked “Confidential” pursuant to this Stipulated Confidentiality Agreement and Protective Order.


         6. Each Party or Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under this Protective Order must take care to limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. Indiscriminate or routinized designations are prohibited.


         7. Confidential Documents shall be so designated prior to their production by marking or stamping each page of the Document produced to or received from a Party with the legend “CONFIDENTIAL.” The application of the legend must be made in a manner so as not to render the documents illegible, illegible after photocopying, or incapable of being subjected to Optical Scanning Recognition. If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

         8. Testimony taken at a deposition, or in other pretrial or trial proceedings, may be designated as CONFIDENTIAL by any Party making a statement to that effect on the record at the deposition. Arrangements shall be made with the court reporter taking and transcribing such deposition to separately bind such portions of the transcript and deposition exhibits containing Information designated as CONFIDENTIAL, and to label such portions appropriately. Counsel for the Parties may also designate an entire deposition transcript as CONFIDENTIAL at the time of the deposition. A Party's failure to designate testimony confidential at the time of deposition shall not constitute the Party's waiver of its right to correct its failure prior to a date ten (10) ...

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.