Justino Rupard v. County of San Diego

Rupard · United States District Court for the Southern District of California · April 30, 2025 · No. 23CV1357 CAB (BLM)

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted in part Defendants’ motion for a protective order concerning the deposition of Dr. Bethann Schaber. The court barred Plaintiff Ronnie Rupard from participating in person or by videoconference because of threats against Dr. Schaber and medical examiner staff, but authorized telephonic participation subject to restrictions against threatening or harassing conduct. The court also ordered County counsel to personally serve the order and facilitate Rupard’s telephonic access to the deposition.

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Writing for the Court
Barbara L. Major
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Decision date
April 30, 2025
Docket number
23CV1357 CAB (BLM)
Procedural posture
Defendants moved ex parte for a protective order governing Plaintiff Ronnie Rupard's participation in the deposition of Dr. Bethann Schaber. The court granted the motion in part, excluding Rupard from in-person and videoconference participation but permitting telephonic participation subject to restrictions.
Standard of review
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), the party seeking a protective order bears the burden of showing good cause, including specific prejudice or harm that will result without protection. The court has broad discretion to determine whether good cause exists and to fashion an appropriate protective order.
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
other

Topics

discovery disputecivil procedure

Practice areas

Civil procedureDiscovery

Questions Presented

  1. Whether good cause existed to exclude Ronnie Rupard from attending Dr. Schaber's deposition in person or by videoconference because of threats and the existing restraining order.
  2. Whether good cause existed to exclude Ronnie Rupard from participating in the deposition by all means other than submitting written questions before the deposition.
  3. What restrictions and alternative method of participation would adequately protect Dr. Schaber while preserving Ronnie Rupard's rights as a party.

Holdings

  1. Defendants established good cause and extraordinary circumstances warranting exclusion of Ronnie Rupard from Dr. Schaber's deposition in person and by videoconference.
  2. Defendants did not establish good cause to prohibit Ronnie Rupard from participating in the deposition by every means other than submitting written questions in advance.
  3. Ronnie Rupard may attend and participate in the deposition telephonically, may ask relevant questions, and may not make threats or harass Dr. Schaber.

Key quotations

The party moving for exclusion of another party must make a “specific showing of harm” that is “more than ordinary garden variety or boilerplate good cause facts which will exist in most civil litigation.” (at 4)
Telephonic participation will ensure that Dr. Schaber not seen on camera by Plaintiff Ronnie Rupard and will minimize any potential harassment or improper conduct by Ronnie Rupard while still preserving his rights as a party to the litigation to participate in the deposition. (at 6)

Factual background

Dr. Bethann Schaber performed the autopsy of Lonnie Rupard and was noticed for deposition. Plaintiff Ronnie Rupard allegedly made threats against Dr. Schaber and staff, and the San Diego County Medical Examiner's Office obtained a restraining order prohibiting him from contacting Dr. Schaber directly or indirectly. Ronnie Rupard was in custody at the San Diego Central Jail, had a competency hearing scheduled shortly before the deposition, and faced practical difficulties in preparing and submitting written deposition questions in advance.

Procedural history

The court had previously granted limited relief from a discovery stay to permit the deposition of Dr. Schaber, which was scheduled for May 5, 2025. Defendants sought to exclude Ronnie Rupard entirely from the deposition or, alternatively, require him to submit written questions in advance. No plaintiff opposed the motion. The court granted partial relief and issued specific instructions concerning service and telephonic participation.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…