Lewis v. CoreCivic of Tennessee, LLC

Summary

The court granted a joint discovery motion concerning Plaintiff’s Rule 30(b)(6) deposition Topic 14, which sought information about vacant or unassigned positions at three CoreCivic facilities during 2019. Applying the federal discovery rules and California FEHA principles, the court held that the requested information was relevant to Plaintiff’s failure-to-accommodate and failure-to-engage claims. The court found the original time range overbroad, limited the relevant period to August 21, 2019 through November 4, 2019, and ordered Defendant to produce a responsive witness.

Holdings

1. Vacant or unassigned positions at the three named facilities were relevant to Plaintiff's FEHA failure-to-accommodate and failure-to-engage-in-the-interactive-process claims because Plaintiff alleged that Defendant made no accommodation and the interactive process could have included restructuring her current position or reassignment to another position.
2. Topic 14 was relevant but overly broad as framed for all of 2019; the permissible period for responsive reassignment information was August 21, 2019, through November 4, 2019.

Questions Presented

1. Whether information about vacant or unassigned positions at Defendant's three facilities was relevant and proportional to Plaintiff's FEHA failure-to-accommodate and failure-to-engage-in-the-interactive-process claims.
2. Whether the requested 2019 date range was overly broad and should be narrowed in light of Plaintiff's medical leave and termination date.

Disposition

other