United States District Court, D. New Mexico
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO COMPEL CERTAIN TESTIMONY FROM DAN OTERO
STEPHAN M. VIDMAR UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to
Compel [Doc. 141], filed on July 24, 2018. Defendant Hidalgo
Medical Services responded on August 7, 2018. [Doc. 156].
Plaintiff replied on August 20, 2018. [Doc. 167]. No. hearing
is necessary because the motion can be decided on the briefs.
Having considered the briefing, relevant portions of the
record, and relevant authorities, and being otherwise fully
advised in the premises, the Court finds that Plaintiff's
motion is not well-taken and will be DENIED.
action, Plaintiff sues her former employer, Hidalgo Medical
Services (“HMS”), and its Chief Executive
Officer, Dan Otero, for sexual harassment and retaliation.
Plaintiff was the Chief Operations Officer of HMS. She
alleges that Defendant Otero sexually harassed her and
ultimately retaliated against her by terminating her
employment when she rejected his advances. Plaintiff alleges
violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and
the New Mexico Human Rights Act, among other related claims.
exhaust her administrative remedies, Plaintiff cross-filed a
charge of discrimination with both the New Mexico Human
Rights Bureau and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(“NMHRB/EEOC”) in January of 2017. Id.
at 6. Defendant Otero submitted a written statement in
response to that charge. [Docs. 141-1, 156-1].
was deposed in this lawsuit on June 27, 2018. [Doc. 156-2] at
1. Plaintiff's counsel questioned him about the written
statement. Otero admitted that there was a factual inaccuracy
in the statement. Id. at 2. The following exchange
then took place:
Q. Any other statements or testimony in this case that
you're aware of that you provided that you didn't
review as carefully as you should have?
A. No. And the reason I bring this one up, Mr. Furth- Q.
A. -is after it got sent, I remember again contacting counsel
and saying, you know what?
MR. BARTELL: Well, wait a minute. You have already mentioned
you reached out to counsel. That is attorney-client
privileged communications, and I direct you not to continue
THE WITNESS: Very good. Thank you, Randy.
Q. When you reached out to counsel, were you seeking legal
advice about what to do?
A. With ...