Wood v. Contra Costa County

4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7 ANDREA WOOD, et al., Case No. 21-cv-00611-MMC 8 Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S 9 V. MOTION FOR DISCOVERY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, et al.,

44 Defendants.

13 The Court is in receipt of plaintiff's motion, filed April 23, 2021, titled "Discovery S 14 || Requested." Having read and considered the motion, the Court rules as follows. 15 To the extent plaintiff seeks an order requiring any party in the above-titled case to || provide her with discovery, the motion is hereby DENIED, without prejudice to plaintiff's || first seeking discovery from defendants. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 (setting forth || procedure by which party can seek documents in another party's possession).

To the extent plaintiff seeks an order requiring the state court conducting the dependency proceedings to provide plaintiff with “all evidence, all testimony, [and] full case files" (See PI.'s Mot. at 1), the motion is hereby DENIED, as the Court lacks jurisdiction to reverse the state court's denial of plaintiff's motion for such documents (see Pl.'s Mot. Exs. A and B). See Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, 398 U.S. 281, 296-97 (1970) (holding district courts "possess no power whatever to sit in. . . review of state court decisions").

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 27, 2021 tebe □□□□□ INE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge