9-1700-10403-2

DHR File No.  ER 19950523

STATE OF MINNESOTA

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

FOR THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Barbara Johnson,                             Complainant, vs. Association of Minnesota Counties,                              Respondent.

PROTECTIVE ORDER

 

Administrative Law Judge Phyllis A. Reha resolved cross-motions to compel compliance with both parties’ requests for discovery in this matter by an Order dated October 24, 1996.  Respondent Association of Minnesota Counties (AMC) requested issuance fo a protective order and that request was granted.

Carole Ryden, Attorney at Law, 2310 American National Bank Building, St. Paul, MN  55101-1808, represents Complainant, Barbara Johnson.  Shawn M. Raiter, King & Hatch, P.A., 1500 Landmark Towers, 345 St. Peter Street, St. Paul, MN  55102, represents AMC.

Based upon the memoranda filed by the parties, all of the filings in this case, and for the reasons set out in the memorandum which follows, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following:

ORDER

            IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1.     Within fifteen days, the AMC shall give the notice set forth in Exhibit A to all employees covered by Complainant’s Interrogatory Numbers 8, 10, 12, and 13.  Within ten days thereafter AMC shall submit those employee’s personnel files to the Administrative Law Judge for an in camera review.  At the same time the personnel files are submitted to the Judge, AMC shall file an affidavit of compliance with the requirements set forth in Exhibit A.

2.     Answers given by AMC to Complainant’s Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 10-13, and Request for Production of Documents Nos. 1-3, 6-8, and 10-13 are covered by this Protective Order.

3.     Any information covered by this Protective Order shall be not disclosed in any manner or form to any person other than AMC, its attorney, Complainant, Complainant’s attorney, and Administrative Law Judge Phyllis A. Reha.

4.     The information covered by this Protective Order may be used only in connection with this contested case proceeding and for no other purpose.

5.     The Complainant must return the documents originally submitted and all copies of that information covered by this Order to AMC’s attorney at the close of this contested case proceeding.

6.     After receiving information covered by this Protective Order, counsel for Complainant may bring a motion, requesting the ALJ to remove or modify the Protective Order as it pertains to any information covered.

Dated this _____th day of October, 1996

 

                                                                             

PHYLLIS A. REHA

Administrative Law Judge