William Meyer, et al. v. County of San Diego, et al.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Dana M. Sabraw (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint stipulation seeking court approval to produce juvenile dependency records pursuant to a third-party subpoena, noting that the intended beneficiaries of the confidentiality statute did not object. The court granted the motion, ordering the production of the records subject to strict confidentiality protections and sealing requirements.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Granting the joint motion for order to produce records pursuant to third-party subpoena“Therefore, the Court GRANTS the joint motion, and orders the following:” | agree with court The court correctly identified that Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 827 generally restricts disclosure of juvenile records but noted that the intended beneficiaries (Plaintiff Madison Meyer and her family) did not object to the disclosure. The court also relied on prior case law within the same docket establishing that § 827 does not prevent disclosure in this context. The order imposes appropriate safeguards (protective order, sealing, limited dissemination) to balance the need for the records in the litigation with the statutory confidentiality interests. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It addresses the legal barrier (Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 827) by citing prior authority in the same case and the lack of objection from the protected parties. It imposes specific, reasonable conditions for the production and use of the records, including adherence to the existing protective order and sealing of filed documents. The reasoning is sufficient for a routine discovery order based on a joint stipulation.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 William Meyer, et al., Case No.: 21-cv-341-RSH-JAC 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 v. MOTION FOR ORDER TO PRODUCE RECORDS PURSUANT 14 County of San Diego, et al., TO THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENA 15 Defendants. 16 ECF No. 372 17 18 19 20 On May 26, 2026, the parties filed a joint stipulation to produce 827 records pursuant 21 to the third-party subpoena served on Kayla Caton. ECF No. 372. The records consist of 22 the juvenile dependency records and transcripts in Plaintiff Madison Meyer’s juvenile 23 dependency case. Because these records consist of juvenile case records, they may not be 24 released to other parties or witnesses, including either percipient or designated experts in 25 this action, absent a court order. Ms. Caton and Plaintiffs seek the Court’s approval to use, 26 rely on, and disseminate these records subject to the existing protective order in this case. 27 ECF No. 372 at 1. The Court previously granted similar requests from the parties. See ECF 28 No. 354; see also see also Meyer v. County of San Diego, No. 21-CV-341-RSH-BLM, 1 2024 WL 505193, at *4 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2024) (“The Court already has found that section 2 827 [of the California Welfare and Institutions Code] does not prevent disclosure of 3 documents and information in M.M.’s juvenile case file.”). Plaintiff Madison Meyer and 4 her family, the parties intended to benefit from the confidentiality provisions of Cal. Welf. 5 & Inst. Code § 827, do not object to the disclosure of records for use in this case. ECF No. 6 372 at 4. 7 Therefore, the Court GRANTS the joint motion, and orders the following: 8 1. Ms. Caton is permitted to, and shall within ten (10) days of entry of this order 9 produce to Plaintiffs those portions of Plaintiff Madison Meyer’s juvenile case 10 records that are in her possession, custody, and/or control, if any; 11 2. The confidentiality of all involved children, reporting parties, parents, and/or any 12 other parties whose interests may be implicated shall be protected from disclosure 13 to the public under the terms of the protective order already in place in this case 14 (ECF Nos. 122, 124) without the need for further Court orders; 15 3. Ms. Caton shall produce all responsive documents in her possession, custody, and/or 16 control in unredacted form, except as noted in the parties’ stipulation (ECF No. 372), 17 that might otherwise be protected under Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 827; 18 4. The documents provided pursuant to this order shall remain subject to the provisions 19 of Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 827, in that the documents may not be disseminated 20 other than to counsel, including outside counsel and County Counsel, their clients, 21 retained and non-retained experts including without limitation attorney Donnie R. 22 Cox, mediators, and any witnesses if needed in this matter, and at trial subject to any 23 admissibility rulings by the Court; 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 // 1 5. The documents produced pursuant to this order shall remain confidential and if filed 2 with this Court will be filed under seal pursuant to the federal court rules and local 3 rules. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 || Dated: May 27, 2026 finer Gd Chat 6 n. Janet A. Cabral 7 United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28