Opinion
20-cv-07400-RS (AGT)
01-27-2022
KRISTEN SILLOWAY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Defendant.
DISCOVERY ORDER
RE: DKT. NO. 56
ALEX G. TSE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The undersigned has reviewed the parties' joint discovery letter at Dkt. 56. Plaintiffs' request for an order compelling CCSF to do the following-to produce privileged documents reflecting legal advice CCSF received concerning its FLSA compliance, to answer plaintiffs' interrogatories regarding CCSF's good faith affirmative defense, and to reopen the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of Steve Ponder to allow further inquiry as to “any attorney advice related to compliance with the FLSA” (see Id. at 1)-is denied. While CCSF has asserted a good faith affirmative defense against plaintiffs' FLSA claim, it has not “affirmatively put the content of privileged communications or advice behind its claim of good faith” as required to find implied waiver of the attorney-client privilege. Goro v. Flowers Foods, Inc., 2019 WL 6252499, at *16 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2019); see McKeen-Chaplin v. Provident Sav. Bank, FSB, 2015 WL 502697, at *9 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 5, 2015) (“Although defendant argues that it classified plaintiffs as exempt in good faith, it does not allege that it relied upon the advice of counsel in making its good faith determination. Defendant must support its good faith defense by citing the advice of counsel in order to put it in issue.”). Plaintiffs' unsupported claims to the contrary are rejected.
IT IS SO ORDERED.