Clarke v. The City of New York et al - Document 42
OPINION. Defendant's application for a protective order as to Bones, 0'Hanlon, Andreoli, Casey, Defeo and Mieles is granted. Finally, as to the two witnesses, Retired Detective Venero and Officer Coumbouris, for whom defendant has not provi ded affidavits, there is no basis for a protective order. Accordingly, defendant's application for a protective order precluding plaintiff from calling Retired Detective Venero and Officer Coumbouris is denied, without prejudice to renewal. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 9/7/2012) Copies Sent By Chambers. (rjm)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------ ------------------ ---------X
MONI QUE CLARKE,
10 Civ. 6330
DET. JOSEPH CASTRO,
PITMAN, United States Magistrate Judge:
Defendant Detective Joseph Castro's application dated
August 31, 2012 for a protective order precluding plaintiff from
calling six non-party witnesses
- Sergeant Angel Bones,
Detective Brian O'Hanlon, Detective Eric Andreoli, Detective Sean
Casey, Retired Detective Francine Defeo and Retired Detective
Raymond Mieles -- is granted.
Defendant's request for a
protective order as to two other non-party witnesses, Retired
Detective Tanya Venero and Police Officer Nicholas Coumbouris, is
denied, without prejudice.
Bones, O'Hanlon, Andreoli, Casey, Defeo and Mieles have
submitted affidavits in which each attests that he or she has no
the circumstances surrounding
plaintiff's arrest or of her arrest it
They also attest
that when shown a photograph of plaintiff t that they did not
recognize her and did not remember her arrest.
Federal Rule of Evidence 401 provides that "Evidence is
(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less
probable than it would be without the evidence; and (b) the fact
is of consequence in determining the action."
Testimony from Bones t O'Hanlon
Andreoli t CaseYt Defeo
and Mieles that each has no memory of the events in issue does
not make either plaintiff's or defendant's version of the facts
any more or less probable.
these witnesses' lack of
recollection has no impact on the case and will neither
corroborate nor contradict plaintiff or defendant.
words t these witnesses will not be able to provide any testimony
that would inform t supportt or refute either plaintiff's or
defendant's version of events because they have no independent
recollection one way or the other.
application for a protective order as to Bones
Andreoli t CaseYI Defeo and Mieles is granted.
FinallYI as to the two witnesses
Venero and Officer Coumbouris
for whom defendant has not
there is no basis for a protective order.
defendant's application for a protective order
precluding plaintiff from calling Retired Detective Venero and
Officer Coumbouris is denied, without prejudice to renewal.
Dated: New York, New York
September 7/ 2012
HENRY PI MAN
United States Magistrate Judge
Copies Transmitted To:
Alexandra Corsi, Esq.
Philip Frank, Esq.
Assistant Corporation Counsel
New York City Law Department
100 Church Street
New York, New York 10007
Joshua P. Fitch, Esq.
Cohen & Fitch LLP
New York, New York 10007