Colon v. City of Lawrence et al

Filing 36

Ch. Magistrate Judge Judith G. Dein: ORDER entered granting in part and denying in part 32 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel. (Dambrosio, Jolyne)

Colon v. City of Lawrence et al

Doc. 36

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

MANUEL COLON, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF LAWRENCE, et al., Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-11960-NMG

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL
This matter is before the court on the "Plaintiff Manuel Colon's Motion to Compel the City of Lawrence to Answer Certain Interrogatories and to Respond to Certain Requests for the Production of Documents" (Docket No. 32). After consideration of the parties' submissions and their oral arguments, the motion is ALLOWED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. The City shall supplement its responses to the plaintiff's First Set of

Interrogatories as follows: a. By November 4, 2010, the City shall modify its response to Interrogatory No. 12 in order to identify which training Officer Farrington attended and when. The response shall be provided under oath. In further responding to Interrogatory No. 13, the City shall review any documents which reflect injuries or complaints of injuries allegedly suffered by individuals at the Lawrence Police Department following an arrest during the time period from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2008, and which complaints were either reviewed by the Internal Affairs Department or led to judicial proceedings.

b.

Dockets.Justia.com

2.

The plaintiff's motion to compel additional responses to Interrogatory Nos.

5 and 6 contained in the plaintiff's Second Set of Interrogatories is DENIED. 3. The City shall supplement its response to Request No. 3 contained in the

plaintiff's Second Set of Requests for Production of Documents by producing any "use of force" reports for the time period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2008. The City may redact the documents to the extent appropriate. However, if the City determines that the production of these documents is overly burdensome, it may object to the production and if appropriate, the plaintiff may file a motion to compel. 4. The City shall provide the supplemental discovery described in paragraphs

1(b) and 3 above by November 24, 2010.

/s/Judith Gail Dein Judith Gail Dein United States Magistrate Judge

Dated: October 26, 2010

2