The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 DARRYL DUNSMORE, et al., Case No.: 20-cv-406-AJB-DDL
12 Plaintiffs,
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL
13 v. ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS
14 SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHERIFF’S
UNDER SEAL
DEPARTMENT, et al.,
15
Defendants. Dkt. No. 797
16
17 On May 14, 2025, the undersigned issued an Order finding “the attorney-
18 client privilege applies to the CIRB Report information contained in the expert
19 reports of Gary Raney, Kelly Ramsey and Pablo Stewart” under Greer v. Cnty. of
20 San Diego, 127 F.4th 1216 (9th Cir. 2025). Dkt. No. 915. The undersigned also
21 found the “present record is insufficient to determine whether the privilege applies
22 to the CIRB Report information contained in the expert report of Jeffrey Keller,”
23 and ordered the County to file a supplemental brief explaining “why the CIRB report
24 pertaining to the in-custody death of Raymond Dix is privileged.” Dkt. No. 915 at 6.
25 Chief Legal Advisor of the San Diego County Sheriff’s Office, Michael Baranic,
26 timely filed a declaration. Dkt. No. 919 (“Baranic Decl.”). For the reasons
27 discussed below and in its previous Order, the Court finds Mr. Keller’s expert report
28 contains information from CIRB Reports that is privileged under Greer.
1 The Court discussed the holding in Greer and the factual background of this
2 case in detail in its previous Order. Dkt. No. 915 at 3-4. In relevant part, the Ninth
3 Circuit noted the CIRB’s stated purpose is “to consult with department legal
4 counsel when an incident occurs which may give rise to litigation” and that “the
5 County’s current and former Chief Legal Advisors both averred that consulting with
6 counsel is the primary purpose of the CIRB.” Greer, 127 F.4th at 1226. The Ninth
7 Circuit concluded:
8 Here, the CIRB reports contained in the record meet the criteria for
attorney-client privilege. Department Policy required the Chief Legal
9
Advisor to be part of the CIRB, and there is no contention that the Chief
10 Legal Advisor was absent from any of the meetings memorialized in
the reports. In each instance, areas of potential liability for the inmate's
11
death were discussed. In most instances, counsel participated actively
12 by asking questions designed to understand and, where appropriate,
by highlighting areas of potential liability. . . . In short, both the
13
participants in the CIRB and its critics consistently viewed the primary
14 purpose of the CIRB as assessing legal liability for a past event and
avoiding legal liability for future similar events. The district court's ruling
15
to the contrary was erroneous.
16 Id.
17 Accordingly, in its previous Order, the Court “read[] Greer to hold the Chief
18 Legal Advisor’s presence at a CIRB meeting renders the ensuing CIRB Reports
19 privileged in [their] entirety regardless of whether the Chief Legal Advisor actively
20 participates in the meeting.” Dkt. No. 915 at 5-6. The Court’s in camera review of
21 documents indicated that neither the Chief Legal Advisor nor the Deputy Chief
22 Legal Advisor attended the CIRB meeting pertaining to the death of Raymond Dix
23 that is referenced in Jeffrey Keller’s report; instead, Heidi Williams from “CIRB
24 BOARD LEGAL” attended. Id. at 6.
25 Mr. Baranic’s declaration demonstrates Ms. Williams’ presence at the CIRB
26 meeting likewise renders the ensuing CIRB Report privileged in its entirety.
27 Specifically, Ms. Williams “was an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of
28 California and employed by the Sheriff’s Office as Sheriff’s Legal Advisor.” Baranic
1 ||Decl. 7 8. Mr. Baranic “designated Ms. Williams to take [his] place as Sheriff's
2 ||Legal Advisor at the September 20, 2023, CIRB meeting regarding Raymond Dix’s
3 custody death,” as was Mr. Baranic’s practice when he was off work. /d. □ 9.
4 ||“Ms. Williams was responsible to fill the same role and maintain the same
5 || confidentiality with regard to the meetings, communications and CIRB reports.” /d.
6 || 10. Therefore, the Court finds that under Greer, the attorney-client privilege
7 ||applies to the CIRB Report information contained in the expert report of Jeffrey
8 || Keller.
9
10 IS SO ORDERED.
11 || Dated: May 22, 2025
12 Tbr! Lhe
13 ‘Hon. DavidD.Leshner □□□
14 United States Magistrate Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28