Peterka v. Maplewood, Missouri, City of, et al.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Directed at Defendant City of Maplewood is GRANTED, in part and DENIED, in part. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant City of Maplewood shall produce the aforementioned documents to Plaintiff within ten days. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 03/13/2015. (CBL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, et al.,
Case No. 4:14CV00823 ERW
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Directed at
Defendant City of Maplewood [ECF No. 34].
In his Motion, Plaintiff requests the Court compel discovery of documents relating to any
claims, lawsuits, complaints and internal complaints or investigations against the City of
Maplewood alleging Section 1983 violations, police brutality, excessive force, police
misconduct, personal injury, or tortious conduct of a police officer occurring within the past ten
years, and Plaintiff requested Sergeant Cavanaugh’s personnel file. Defendant City of
Maplewood objected to these requests as overly broad, not relevant, and requesting privileged
material. After hearing arguments from the parties at a hearing held on February 20, 2015, the
Court ordered Defendant City of Maplewood to produce the documents in question for in camera
review by the Court.
The Court has examined every page of the documents submitted for review and finds as
follows. Sergeant Cavanaugh’s personnel file shall be produced in its entirety with three
exceptions. First, page eight of “Applicant Questionnaire” need not be produced as it contains
sensitive personal financial information not relevant to this matter. Second, Sergeant
Cavanaugh’s social security number shall be redacted from every document contained in the file.
Third, any documents pertaining to Sergeant Cavanaugh’s secondary employment need not be
produced as they contain information not relevant to this matter.
The file titled “MPD IAD Files” need not be produced in its entirety. The following files
shall be produced: complaint filed by Tiphany Rives against Officer Heitman alleging excessive
force, anonymous complaint against Officers Sinnard and Fernandez alleging excessive force
received January 3, 2013, complaint against Officer Sinnard alleging excessive force sent on July
29, 2011, file on Officer Darryl Overall from August 2, 2010, for allegations of use of excessive
force while off-duty, and the file containing allegations of excessive force against Officers
Dibissachop and Heitman dated June 20, 2010. After a careful examination of all files produced,
the Court finds the remaining files are not relevant to this matter and not likely to lead to
admissible evidence. The Court did not find any files of excessive force complaints against
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Directed at Defendant
City of Maplewood is GRANTED, in part and DENIED, in part.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant City of Maplewood shall produce the
aforementioned documents to Plaintiff within ten days.
So Ordered this 13th day of March, 2015.
E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?