Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Livingston v. University of Kansas Hospital Authority

United States District Court, D. Kansas

January 24, 2019

ANNIE LUCILE LIVINGSTON, Plaintiff,
v.
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, Defendant.

          Annie Lucile Livingston, PLAINTIFF, PRO SE

          ERIC E. PACKEL, POLSINELLI PC, HENRY J. THOMAS, ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

          AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER

          JAMES P. O'HARA U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         The parties agree that during the course of discovery it may be necessary to disclose certain confidential information relating to the subject matter of this action. They agree that certain categories of such information should be treated as confidential, protected from disclosure outside this litigation, and used only for purposes of prosecuting or defending this action and any appeals. The parties jointly request entry of this proposed Protective Order to limit the disclosure, dissemination, and use of certain identified categories of confidential information.

         The parties assert in support of their request that protection of the identified categories of confidential information is necessary to protect both the Parties and other persons from potential annoyance and embarrassment, as well as to safeguard confidential business and proprietary information. Discovery in this case may potentially seek, subject to discovery and relevance standards, the following private information from the Parties and non-parties: medical, tax and financial information and other private and confidential documents regarding the Parties and non-parties; confidential information concerning the University of Kansas Hospital Authority's (“UKHA”) business and business operations; UKHA's employees; confidential portions of personnel files of Parties and non-parties; and the address, contact information, and other personal information of non-parties (“confidential information”). Good cause exists for the issuance of a protective order, including the fact that many persons associated with this matter reside or work in a relatively small group of communities that are geographically close; and if the confidential information were known in the general community, such knowledge could lead to embarrassment, humiliation, and/or unfair business or competitive advantage, and it could potentially impact upon certain persons' personal and/or work relationships.

         For good cause shown under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c), the Court grants the parties' joint request and hereby enters the following Protective Order:

         1. Scope.

         All documents and materials produced in the course of discovery of this case, including initial disclosures, responses to discovery requests, all deposition testimony and exhibits, and information derived directly therefrom (hereinafter collectively “documents”), are subject to this Order concerning Confidential Information as set forth below.

         2. Definition of Confidential Information.

         The Parties have agreed that certain categories of non-public documents and information, if produced or disclosed during this litigation, shall be used only for purposes of this lawsuit and will be treated as confidential. As used in this Order, “Confidential Information” is defined as information that the producing party designates in good faith has been previously maintained in a confidential manner and should be protected from disclosure and use outside the litigation because its disclosure and use is restricted by statute or could potentially cause harm to the interests of disclosing party or nonparties. For purposes of this Order, the parties will limit their designation of “Confidential Information” to the following categories of information or documents: the confidential business, financial and/or net-worth information of the Parties, marketing strategies, customer lists, customer preferences, projected financial information, business plans, and related information; the confidential personnel and/or human resource files of any of UKHA's current or former employees or agents, including, but not limited to, any internal investigative materials; salary and/or benefits information relating to any of UKHA's current or former employees or agents; medical information regarding Parties and non-parties; and employment and/or tax records relating to the Parties or others. This Order shall not apply to information that is available to the public or to information that is lawfully obtained from sources other than the Parties through the discovery process.

         3. Form and Timing of Designation.

         The producing party may designate documents as containing Confidential Information and therefore subject to protection under this Order by marking or placing the words “CONFIDENTIAL” (hereinafter “the marking”) on the document and on all copies in a manner that will not interfere with the legibility of the document. As used in this Order, “copies” includes electronic images, duplicates, extracts, summaries or descriptions that contain the Confidential Information. The marking will be applied prior to or at the time the documents are produced or disclosed. Applying the marking to a document does not mean that the document has any status or protection by statute or otherwise except to the extent and for the purposes of this Order. Copies that are made of any designated documents must also bear the marking, except that indices, electronic databases, or lists of documents that do not contain substantial portions or images of the text of marked documents and do not otherwise disclose the substance of the Confidential Information are not required to be marked. By marking a designated document as confidential, the designating attorney or party appearing pro se thereby certifies that the document contains Confidential Information as defined in this Order.

         4. Inadvertent Failure to Designate.

         The inadvertent failure to designate material as “Confidential” does not preclude a party from subsequently making such a designation and, in that case, the material is treated as confidential only after being properly designated. Any failure to designate information as “Confidential” that was the result of mistake or oversight will not be deemed a waiver and may be cured by providing written notice thereof to counsel for the receiving party. Upon receipt of such notice, counsel shall immediately take action to maintain and restrict the use of such information in accordance with the terms of this Protective Order.

         5. Depositions.

         Any party to this action may also designate deposition testimony as “Confidential” pursuant to this Protective Order by advising opposing counsel of record, in writing, within 30 days after receipt of a copy of the transcript, or such other time period as may be mutually agreed upon by the parties, of the pages and lines of the deposition that the party believes fall under paragraphs one and two. Alternatively, any party may, on the record at the deposition, designate deposition testimony as “Confidential” by advising all persons present that the party believes that the portion of the deposition in ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.