Opinion
04 Civ. 4005 (LTS) (DFE).
November 4, 2005
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The attorneys' joint letter dated October 12, 2005 was received by me via fax on October 24 and by mail on October 26. Neither copy had any signature on the three signature lines. On October 26, my law clerk told Mr. Sturm's office that I need the three signatures. I have still not received them, but I have decided to rule on the letter without further delay.
I rule that Plaintiffs' Position sets forth an entirely reasonable proposal for an in camera inspection of the 21 withheld pages of Ms. Sierra Trejo's personal notebook. The defendants should realize that, even if I find that some withheld material is relevant and not privileged, I must still limit the discovery if I determine that "the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit,. . . ." Rule 26(b)(2)(iii), Fed.R.Civ.P. "This power, moreover, may be employed where the burden is not measured in the time or expense . . ., but lies instead in the adverse consequences of the disclosure of sensitive, albeit unprivileged, material." Johnson v. Nyack Hospital, 169 F.R.D. 550, 562 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (Kaplan, J.).
If I uphold plaintiffs' redactions, then defendants must, within five business days, reimburse plaintiffs for the expense of the translator. If defendants do not, by November 10, 2005, serve written confirmation that they will abide by those ground rules, then I will deem that they have withdrawn this document request. If they do serve a timely confirmation, then plaintiffs must submit the translation to me in camera within ten business days.