Adams v. The City of Montgomery, No. 2:2010cv00924 - Document 124 (M.D. Ala. 2012)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER denying 118 MOTION to Reconsider, as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 6/6/2012. (wcl, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION WILLIE ADAMS, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:10cv924-MHT (WO) OPINION AND ORDER It is ORDERED that defendant City of Montgomery s motion to reconsider (Doc. No. 118) is denied. *** The court notes that much of defendant City of Montgomery s motion repeats arguments already made and considered. However, the court wishes to respond to the city s renewed assertion that it was under no obligation to disclose the identity of internal-affairs investigator Walter Lilley, Jr. the signed witness The city has already conceded that statements (Doc. No. 81-2) discoverable and not covered by any privilege. were Lilley s signature is on these documents as the investigating officer. Thus, even under the assumption that the city is correct that plaintiff Willie Adams s interrogatories did not require the listing of Lilley s name, Adams s counsel would have learned about Lilley s existence if the city had turned over the signed witness statements during discovery. With regard to the city s argument that it could properly withhold Lilley s identity as privileged, the city s privilege log -which its attorney maintains was timely sent in September 2011 -refers to Lilley in its description of the privileged documents. Privilege Log (Doc. No. 96-1) at 1. positions are self-defeating: if The city s multiple its attorney had complied with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5) s procedures for producing a privilege log, Adams s counsel would have been informed of Lilley s identity. DONE, this the 6th day of June, 2012. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.