Free Uncategorized - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP
Firm State Bar No. 00443100 Renaissance One Two North Central Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85004-2391
TELEPHONE 602.229.5200

Lonnie J. Williams, Jr. (#005966) ([email protected]) Dawn C. Valdivia (#020715) ([email protected]) Attorneys for Plaintiff Marcela Johnson IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Marcela Johnson, Plaintiff, v. Charles Schwab Corporation, Defendant. NO. CV 04-0790 PHX-JWS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING SUBPOENA FOR DOCUMENTS

Plaintiff Marcela Johnson replies in support of her motion for an order prohibiting the Custodian of Records for the City of Phoenix Police Department (the "Police") from providing documents in response to the Subpoena for Documents ("Subpoena") issued by Defendant Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. ("Schwab"). Schwab has agreed that it is not seeking documents related to "arrests, criminal charges, indictments and/or prosecutions" or any physical test results or other medical information. To this extent, Ms. Johnson asks this Court to issue an Order narrowing the Subpoena, at a minimum, in conformance with Schwab's position. Even narrowing the Subpoena as stated, it is still overly broad in that it seeks a broad category of documents that are not relevant or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Ms. Johnson agrees that Schwab is entitled to applications, the dates on which she applied and was turned down for employment, and the reason she was not selected for employment. Schwab has not, however, presented any rationale as to why it is entitled to "any and all file(s) regarding Ms. Johnson, ... all correspondence between the Phoenix Police Department and Ms. Johnson, interview notes, evaluations, tests and test results." To the extent that the interview notes contain
Case 2:04-cv-00790-EHC Document 137 Filed 04/03/2006 Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

the reason that Ms. Johnson was not selected for employment, Schwab is entitled to that portion of those notes, but Schwab has not, and cannot, explain why it is entitled to any other notes. Similarly, Schwab has not, and cannot, explain why it is entitled to all correspondence, evaluations, tests, and test results between the Police and Ms. Johnson. Such documents may contain medical or psychological information that is not relevant to the issues in this case. Additionally, Schwab is not entitled to the polygraph test or its results. While it is true that evidence need not be admissible to be discoverable, it still must be relevant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. Any polygraph taken by Ms. Johnson two years after Schwab fired her Johnson is not relevant to whether Ms. Johnson, a Hispanic female, was terminated for reporting an incident of unwelcome conduct by a male co-worker. Finally, Schwab incorrectly states that Ms. Johnson "apparently made misrepresentations regarding her application with the Police." Response at 2:5-7. Ms. Johnson's testimony is clear, she scored low on a portion of a written and reading test and she failed the polygraph. See Exhibit A to Response, pp. 272:17 - 273:13. She made no misrepresentation regarding whether she failed the polygraph. This is yet another attempt to attack Ms. Johnson's credibility with specious accusations. Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to enter an order narrowing Schwab's Subpoena request to copies of Ms. Johnson's application and resumes, the dates on which she applied and was turned down, and documents that reflect the reason she was not selected for employment. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 3rd day of April, 2006. QUARLES & BRADY STREICH LANG LLP

By

s/Dawn C. Valdivia Lonnie J. Williams, Jr. Dawn C. Valdivia Attorneys for Plaintiff Marcela Johnson
Page 2 of 3

Case 2:04-cv-00790-EHC

Document 137 -2- Filed 04/03/2006

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

I hereby certify that on April 3, 2006, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of Notice of Electronic filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: Joseph T. Clees Karen Gillen Michelle Ganz Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. A copy of this document was provided to The Honorable John W. Sedwick s/Dawn C. Valdivia
QBPHX\115637.00002\2001275.1

Case 2:04-cv-00790-EHC

Document 137 -3- Filed 04/03/2006

Page 3 of 3