Kellum et al v. London et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
DONALD KELLUMII, ROSALIND
KELLUM, and SARAH SUBLET-
MCCLINTON,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
GREG LONDON, SARPY COUNTY
SHERIFFS DEPT., LAVISTA POLICE
DEPT., MIKE SCHOFIELD, DAVID
BLACK, Mayor; and SARPY COUNTY,
Defendants.
8:23CV354
PROTECTIVE ORDER
The parties’ joint motion for entry of a Protective Order, Filing No. 42, is
granted. The Court enters the following Protective Order governing the disclosure
of discovery material in this action.
Plaintiffs Donald Kellum II, Rosalind Kellum, and Sarah Sublet-McClinton
(“Plaintiffs”) have requested the production of documents and/or information that
at least one party considers to be or to contain confidential information, and that
are subject to protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). Plaintiffs,
along with Defendants Greg London, Sarpy County Sheriff, Sarpy County Sheriff’s
Office, Sarpy County, Mike Schofield, La Vista Chief of Police, La Vista Police
Department, and David Black, Mayor of Papillion (collectively, the “Parties”), agree
that good cause exists to protect the confidential nature of the information
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 1 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>

2
contained in documents, interrogatory responses, response for requests for
admission, and/or deposition testimony.
The Parties expect to exchange documents and information including,
among other things: (1) law-enforcement sensitive materials, including materials
specific to a particular deputy; (2) law-enforcement records and/or documents
maintained by Defendants referencing personally identifiable information and
confidential information of nonparties to this action; (3) law-enforcement records
and/or documents maintained by Defendants describing tactical and/or strategic
decisions; and (4) personnel information.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. All documents, testimony, and other materials produced by the parties
in this case and labeled as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”
shall be used only in this proceeding.
2. Use of any information or documents labeled “CONFIDENTIAL” or
“ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” and subject to this Protective Order, including all
information derived therefrom, shall be restricted solely to the litigation of this case
and shall not be used by any party for any purpose other than litigating or
attempting to settle this case, including but not limited to the preparation, filing,
service, litigation, and/or settlement of any claims that may in the future be
asserted by Plaintiffs against the Defendants. This Protective Order, however,
does not restrict the disclosure or use of any information or documents lawfully
obtained by the receiving party through means or sources outside of this litigation.
Should a dispute arise as to whether the disclosure of any specific information or
document was authorized by the preceding sentence, the burden shall be on the
disclosing party to show that such information or document was lawfully obtained
through means or sources outside of this litigation.
3. The Parties, and third parties subpoenaed by one of the parties, may
designate as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” documents,
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 2 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>

3
testimony, written responses, or other materials produced in this case if they
contain information that the producing party has a good faith basis for asserting is
confidential under the applicable legal standard, including but not limited to
materials that may contain PHI. The party shall designate each page of the
document with “CONFIDENTIAL” or “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” if practical to do
so.
4. All documents of any nature including, but not limited to, briefs,
motions, memoranda, transcripts, discovery responses, evidence, and the like,
that are filed with the court for any purpose and that contain Discovery Material
designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” shall be
provisionally filed under restricted access with the filing party’s motion for leave to
file restricted access documents. A party seeking to file Discovery Material under
restricted access must comply with the court’s rules and electronic docketing
procedures for filing such motions.
5. Within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of the final transcript of
the deposition of any party or witness in this case, a party or the witness may
designate as “CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” any portion of
the transcript that the party or witness contends discloses confidential information.
If the transcript containing any such material is filed with the Court, it shall be filed
under restricted access and marked in the manner described in paragraph 4.
Unless otherwise agreed, all deposition transcripts shall be treated as
“Confidential” until the expiration of the thirty-day period.
6. “CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” information and
documents subject to this Protective Order shall not be filed with the Court or
included in whole or in part in pleadings, motions, briefs, etc., filed in this case,
except when any portion of such pleadings, motions, briefs, etc. have been filed
under restricted access by counsel and marked in the same manner as described
in paragraph 4 above. Such restricted portion(s) of pleadings, motions, briefs,
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 3 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>

4
documents, etc., shall be opened only by the Court or by personnel authorized to
do so by the Court.
7. Use of any information, documents, or portions of documents marked
“CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” including all information
derived therefrom, shall be restricted solely to the following persons, who agree to
be bound by the terms of this Protective Order, unless additional persons are
stipulated by counsel or authorized by the Court:
a. Outside counsel of record for the parties and the administrative
staff of outside counsel’s firms; and
b. In-house counsel for the parties, and the administrative staff for
each in-house counsel; and,
c. Any party to this action who is an individual, and every employee,
director, officer, or manager of any party to this action who is not
an individual, but only to the extent necessary to further the interest
of the parties in this litigation; and,
d. Independent consultants or expert witnesses (including partners,
associates, and employees of the firm which employs such
consultant or expert) retained by a party or its attorneys for
purposes of this litigation, but only to the extent necessary to
further the interests of the parties in this litigation; and,
e. The Court and its personnel, including but not limited to,
stenographic reporters regularly employed by the Court and/or
engaged by the Court or the parties during the litigation of this
action; and,
f. The authors and the original recipients of the documents; and,
g. Any court reporter or videographer reporting a deposition during
the litigation of this action; and,
h. Any individual who is named as a defendant in any pleadings, but
who has not yet been formally served with process, but only to the
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 4 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>

5
extent necessary to effect service of process on that individual;
and,
i. Any attorney, whether or not the attorney is counsel of record in
this action, who has been retained or authorized in this matter by
any individual who is named as a defendant, if the attorney is
authorized to accept service on behalf of the defendant, but only
to the extent necessary to effect service of process on that
individual.
8. Use of any information, documents, or portions of documents marked
“CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” including all information
derived therefrom, shall be restricted solely to the persons listed in paragraphs
7(a), 7(b), 7(d), 7(e), and 7(g), unless additional persons are stipulated by counsel
or authorized by the Court, provided that a summons and a copy of any amended
complaint may be disclosed to the persons listed in paragraphs 7(h) and 7(i).
9. Prior to being shown any documents produced by another party
marked “CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” any person listed
under paragraphs 7(c) or 7(d) shall agree to be bound by the terms of this Order
by signing the agreement attached as Exhibit A. In the event any person refuses
to sign the attached agreement form with respect to discovery material designated
“CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” no such information may be
disclosed to such person without prior written consent of the designating party.
10. Whenever information designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” OR
“ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” pursuant to this Protective Order is to be discussed
by a party or disclosed in a deposition, hearing, or pre-trial proceeding, the
designating party may exclude from the room any person other than those persons
designated in paragraph 7 for the portion of the deposition, hearing or pre-trial
proceeding.
11. If a party believes that any documents or materials have been
inappropriately designated by another party or subpoenaed party, that party shall
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 5 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>

6
confer with counsel for the designating parry. As part of that conferral, the
designating party much assess whether redaction is a viable alternative to
complete non-disclosure. If the parties are unable to resolve the matter informally,
a party may file an appropriate motion before the Court requesting that the Court
determine whether the Protective Order cover the document in dispute.
Regardless of which party files the motion, the party seeking to protect a document
from disclosure bears the burden of establishing good cause for why the document
should not be disclosed. A party who disagrees with another party’s designation
must nevertheless abide by that designation until the matter is resolved by
agreement of the parties or by order of the Court.
12. The inadvertent failure to designate a document, testimony, or other
material as “CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” shall not operate
as a waiver of the party’s right to later designate the document, testimony, or other
material as “CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” The receiving
party or its counsel shall not disclose such documents or materials if that party or
counsel knows or reasonable should know that a claim of confidentiality would be
made by the producing party. Promptly after receiving notice from the producing
party of a claim of confidentiality, the receiving party or its counsel shall inform the
producing party of all pertinent facts relating to the prior disclosure of the newly
designated documents and materials and prevent further disclosure.
13. Designation by either party of information or documents as
“CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” or failure to so designate, will
not constitute an admission that information or documents are or are not
confidential. Neither party may introduce into evidence in any proceeding between
the parties, other than a motion to determine whether the Protective Order covers
the information or documents in dispute, the fact that the other party designated or
failed to designate information or documents as “CONFIDENTIAL” OR
“ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”.
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 6 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>

7
14. Within thirty (30) calendar days after the entry of final judgment no
longer subject to appeal on the merits of this case, or the execution of any
agreement between the parties to resolve amicably and settle this case, or the
execution of any agreement between the parties to resolve amicably and settle this
case, the parties and any person authorized by the Protective Order to receive
information or documents marked as “CONFIDENTIAL” OR “ATTORNEYS’ EYES
ONLY” shall make reasonable efforts to return to the producing party or third party,
or to destroy, all information and documents subject to this Protective Order.
15. This Protective Order shall not constitute a waiver of any party’s or
non-party’s right to oppose any discovery request or object to the admissibility of
any document, testimony, or other information.
16. Nothing in this Protective Order shall limit the parties’ right to disclose
their own confidential information.
17. Nothing in this Protective Order shall prejudice any party from
arresting any privilege or protection – including but not limited to the attorney-client
privilege, attorney work product, or law enforcement privilege, if any. This
Protective Order does not constitute a concession by any party that any privilege
or protection either exists or applies to any material.
18. Nothing in this Protective Order shall prejudice any party from seeking
amendments to expend or restrict the rights of access to and use of confidential
information or other modifications, subject to order by the Court.
19. The restrictions on disclosure and use of confidential information shall
survive the conclusion of this action, and it shall be binding on the parties and their
legal counsel in the future.
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 7 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>

8
Dated this 7th day of January, 2026.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Jacqueline M. DeLuca
United States Magistrate Judge
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 8 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>

9
EXHIBIT A
I, ____________________________, have been advised by counsel of record for
______________________ in DONALD KELLUM, et al. v. GREG LONDON,
Sarpy County Sheriff, et al., District of Nebraska Case No. 8:23CV354 of the
protective order governing th edelivery, publication, and disclosure of confidential
documents and information produced in this litigation. I have read a copy of the
protective order and agree to abide by its terms.
__________________________________ _________________
Signed Date
__________________________________
Printed
8:23-cv-00354-JMG-JMD Doc # 44 Filed: 01/07/26 Page 9 of 9 - Page ID #
<pageID>