Opinion
10 Civ. 6005 (RWS)
08-29-2014
ADRIAN SCHOOLCRAFT, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants.
APPEARANCES: Attorneys for the Plaintiff LAW OFFICE OF NATHANIEL B. SMITH 111 Broadway Suite 1305 New York, NY 10006 By: Nathaniel B. Smith, Esq. Attorneys for the City Defendants MICHAEL A. CARDOZO CORPORATION COUNSEL OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 By: Ryan G. Shaffer, Esq. Attorneys for Jamaica Hospital Medical Center MARTIN CLEARWATER & BELL LLP 220 East 42nd Street, 13th Floor New York, NY 10017 By: Gregory John Radomisli, Esq. Attorneys for Dr. Isak Isakov IVONE, DEVINE AND JENSEN, LLP 2001 Marcus Avenue Lake Success, NY 11042 By: Brian Lee, Esq. Attorneys for non-party Dr. Indira Patel VOUTÉ, LOHRFINK, MAGRO & MCANDREW LLP 100 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017 By: Mark McAndrew, Esq.
OPINION APPEARANCES:
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
LAW OFFICE OF NATHANIEL B. SMITH
111 Broadway
Suite 1305
New York, NY 10006
By: Nathaniel B. Smith, Esq.
Attorneys for the City Defendants
MICHAEL A. CARDOZO
CORPORATION COUNSEL OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
100 Church Street
New York, NY 10007
By: Ryan G. Shaffer, Esq.
Attorneys for Jamaica Hospital Medical Center
MARTIN CLEARWATER & BELL LLP
220 East 42nd Street, 13th Floor
New York, NY 10017
By: Gregory John Radomisli, Esq.
Attorneys for Dr. Isak Isakov
IVONE, DEVINE AND JENSEN, LLP
2001 Marcus Avenue
Lake Success, NY 11042
By: Brian Lee, Esq.
Attorneys for non-party Dr. Indira Patel
VOUTÉ, LOHRFINK, MAGRO & MCANDREW LLP
100 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017
By: Mark McAndrew, Esq.
Sweet, D.J.
Discovery disputes have plagued this highly controversial action, perhaps understandably. The letters submitted by Plaintiff Adrian Schoolcraft ("Schoolcraft" or the "Plaintiff") on July 23, July 25, August 5, and August 12, 2014, defendant the City of New York (the "City") on July 29 and August 12, 2014, defendant Dr. Isak Isakov ("Dr. Isakov") on August 5, 2014, defendant Jamaica Hospital Medical Center ("JHMC") on July 24, 2014, and non-party witness Dr. Indira Patel ("Dr. Patel") on July 31, August 14, and August 15, 2014 are being treated as motions to compel discovery and oppositions to such motions. Prior Proceedings
A detailed recitation of the facts of the case is provided in this Court's opinion dated May 6, 2011. See Schoolcraft v. City of N.Y., 10 Civ. 6005, 2011 WL 1758635, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. May 6, 2011). Familiarity with those facts is assumed.
The instant motion concerns several issues related to discovery. Plaintiff has moved for (1) continuation of the deposition of Sergeant Michael Purpi ("Sergeant Purpi"); (2) continuation of the deposition of Dr. Khin Mar Lwin ("Dr. Lwin"); (3) several outstanding documents Plaintiff had requested from the City in discovery; and (4) an order for the counsel representing Dr. Patel to limit his interference in Plaintiff's deposition of Dr. Patel. The City has moved for Plaintiff to update his discovery responses pertaining to his financial and physical/emotional damages. Dr. Isakov has moved to suppress Plaintiff's use of deposition recordings in his current motions regarding the deposition of Dr. Patel. The Deposition of Sergeant Purpi
The deposition of Sergeant Purpi will be continued for one hour and a half. Short objections may be stated, but the witness will answer all questions other than those to which an objection based on privilege is made. Document Production
The following documents shall be produced by the City to Plaintiff:
Compstat, Trafficstat and comparable documents relating to Patrol Borough Brooklyn North in which defendant Deputy Inspector Steven Mauriello ("Mauriello"), defendant Deputy Chief Michael Marino ("Marino") and defendant Captain Theodore Lauterborn's ("Lauterborn") participated or had knowledge concerning;
The Compstat-generated crime records of the 81st Precinct for October 31, 2009;
The Crime Reporting Handbook;
Documents demanded in Plaintiffs February 14, 2014 demand #51, 52 and Interrogatory #4;
The Early Intervention Unit file by Sergeant Weiss of early spring 2009; and
The file maintained by the NYPD on the Plaintiff's administrative appeal of his 2008 performance evaluation. The Deposition of Dr. Levin
No further deposition of Dr. Levin will be taken. The Deposition of Dr. Patel
The deposition of Dr. Patel will be resumed for one hour. All questions will be answered except those asked and an objection on the ground of privilege is made. Grounds for any objection will be briefly stated in the deposition. Plaintiff's Discovery Responses
Plaintiff shall update his discovery responses pertaining to his financial and physical/emotional damages within two weeks of the filing of this Order. Dr. Isakov's Request
Given the aforementioned ruling on Dr. Patel's deposition, the motion of Dr. Isakov is denied as moot.
It is so ordered. Dated: New York, New York
August 29, 2014
/s/_________
Robert W. Sweet, U.S.D.J.