Estate of James Evans, by and through successors in interest, Lashonda Banks and Godfrey Evans; Lashonda Banks, individually; Godfrey Evans, individually v. County of Los Angeles; Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department; Sheriff Robert Luna, individually; and Does 1 through 10, individually

Estate of Evans · United States District Court for the Central District of California · September 15, 2025 · No. 2:24-cv-09198-SRM-JC

Summary

This document is a Modified Protective Order entered by the United States District Court for the Central District of California in Estate of James Evans v. County of Los Angeles. It governs the designation, handling, use, and disclosure of confidential discovery materials, including information implicating the privacy rights of county employees and inmates. The order also addresses procedures for seeking to file protected material under seal and states that its terms do not extend beyond commencement of trial.

Holdings

  1. A stipulated protective order does not itself authorize a party to file confidential discovery material under seal; a separate application satisfying the applicable local-rule standards is required.
  2. A party seeking to seal material related to a dispositive motion or trial must show compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and legal justification, and the requested relief must be narrowly tailored.
  3. The protective-order protections extend to protected discovery material and information derived from it, but do not govern use during a court hearing or trial and generally terminate upon commencement of trial, subject to any separate order by the presiding judge.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether good cause existed to enter a stipulated protective order governing confidential discovery material.
  2. Whether designation of discovery material as confidential automatically authorized filing that material under seal.
  3. What standards and procedures govern requests to file confidential discovery material under seal.
  4. How confidential designations must be limited, made, corrected, and handled during the litigation.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (5)

  • Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
  • Phillips v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
  • Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electrics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999)(followed)
  • Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010)(followed)
  • Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180-81 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…