From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dashner v. Riedy

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Feb 11, 2004
Civil Action No. 99-CV-02124 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 11, 2004)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 99-CV-02124

February 11, 2004


ORDER


NOW, this 11th day of February, 2004, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion for Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence and for Plaintiffs' Failure to Comply with This Honorable Court's Discovery Order, filed January 16, 2004; upon consideration of Plaintiffs' Answer and Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Sanctions, filed January 20, 2004; and after oral argument held January 16, 2004,

IT IS ORDERED that defendants' motion is granted in part. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all testimony, including factual testimony and expert testimony, of plaintiffs' expert forensic pathologist Doctor John J. Shane concerning the alleged discovery by Doctor Shane on or about May 4, 2003 at 629 Christian Street, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, of additional bullets, bullet projecfiles, bullet fragments and/or bullet holes which Doctor Shane asserted had not been found previously by anyone else, and all testimony of Doctor Shane derived from, regarding, and/or pertaining to, bullet trajectories from those bullets, projecfiles, bullet fragments and holes, is stricken from the record of the trial of this case.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all testimony, including factual testimony, and expert testimony, of Dr. Shane concerning bullet trajectories from those bullets, projecfiles, bullet fragments and holes, and concerning an alleged third burst of gunfire from defendant police officer Joseph Riedy, is stricken from the record of the trial of this case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs are precluded from introducing any additional evidence, including testimony, opinions, physical evidence and exhibits, derived from the excluded testimony of Doctor Shane. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before February 18, 2004 defendants shall provide the undersigned and counsel for plaintiffs with a written itemized statement of all counsel fees and costs incurred in the preparation and presentation of defendants' within motion for sanctions.

See the accompanying Memorandum for our reasons and analysis.

At oral argument of the within motion on January 16, 2004 defense counsel, Susan R. Engel, Esquire, advised the court that defense counsel spent approximately six hours in preparing and arguing the motion, and stated that she would provide the court with the hourly billing rate of her firm for those services. It is the sense of this Order that defendants shall summarize their request for counsel fees and costs by submitting a written itemized statement, including a description of the nature of the legal services performed, the specific dates when such services were performed, the amount of time devoted to each service, and the hourly billing rate for each service, together with an enumeration of all costs, if any, incurred by defense counsel in this matter. Following receipt of the written fee and cost statement, the undersigned will rule upon defendants' request for counsel fees and costs.


Summaries of

Dashner v. Riedy

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Feb 11, 2004
Civil Action No. 99-CV-02124 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 11, 2004)
Case details for

Dashner v. Riedy

Case Details

Full title:GWENDOLYN DASHNER and JOHN HIRKO, SR., as Co-Administrators of the Estate…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Feb 11, 2004

Citations

Civil Action No. 99-CV-02124 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 11, 2004)