Jones v. Skolnik et al

Filing 346

ORDERED that Jones' # 264 Motion for Adverse Inference Instruction Due to Spoilation of Relevant Evidence is DENIED. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 8/6/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 ***** 9 CHRISTOPHER A. JONES, 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 HOWARD SKOLNIK, et al., 13 Defendants. ) ) 3:10-cv-00162-LRH-VPC ) ) ) ORDER ) ) ) ) ) 14 15 Before the Court is Plaintiff Christopher A. Jones’ (“Jones”) Motion for Adverse 16 Inference Instruction Due to Spoilation of Relevant Evidence. Doc. #264.1 Defendants Yaqub 17 Mustafaa and Taerik Berry (collectively “Defendants”) filed an Opposition (Doc. #273), to which 18 Jones replied (Doc. #277). 19 The Court has reviewed the relevant documents and pleadings on file in this matter and 20 finds that Jones’ Motion is moot. Therein, Jones argues that he is entitled to an adverse inference 21 instruction due to the spoilation of evidence, namely an audible tape-recording of his prison 22 disciplinary hearing on July 30, 2007. However, the Nevada Department of Corrections 23 (“NDOC”) has since produced an audible copy of the disciplinary hearing for Jones’ inspection 24 in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(c). Moreover, on June 12, 2014, 25 Magistrate Judge Cooke issued an Order denying Jones’ Motion to Compel Discovery from 26 Mustafaa and to Determine the Sufficiency of Answers. Doc. #318. Therein, Magistrate Judge 27 Cooke reviewed Mustafaa’s Answer to Jones’ Request for Production #6, related to the 28 1 Refers to the Court’s docket number. 1 audiotapes at issue, and determined that Mustafaa’s response shall stand. Because Jones’ request 2 relates to a matter that has since been resolved, his Motion for Adverse Inference Instruction Due 3 to Spoilation of Relevant Evidence is denied as moot. To the extent that Jones challenges the 4 authenticity and trustworthiness of the audiotapes, he must do so via an appropriate motion 5 before the Court. 6 7 8 9 10 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Jones’ Motion for Adverse Inference Instruction Due to Spoilation of Relevant Evidence (Doc. #264) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 6th day of August, 2014. 11 __________________________________ LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?