CRESS et al v. VENTNOR CITY et al

Filing 167

ORDER granting in part and denying in part Pltfs' 133 & 134 Motion to Unseal Document, etc. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 6/13/2012. (drw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
LISA CRESS,
on behalf of herself, and as
GUARDIAN FOR MINOR K.C. and
as GUARDIAN FOR MINOR C.C.,
and DANIEL LOMBARDI,

CIVIL NO. 08-1873(NLH)(AMD)
MEMORANDUM
OPINION & ORDER

Plaintiffs/CounterDefendants,
v.
VENTNOR CITY, ATLANTIC
COUNTY, THEODORE BERGMAN,
DOUGLAS BIAGI, MICHAEL
MILLER, SCHALLUS, JOHN DOE
#1-10(MASKED MEN IN BLACK),
EGG HARBOR TOWNSHIP, JAMES
DONALDSON, JOSEPH BONSALL,
JAY WOODS, JASON RZEMYK,
JAMES SHARKEY, SEAN CLANCEY,
FRANK CULMONE, FRANCISCO
CORREA, DAVE DRUDING, STEVEN
SWANKOSKI, and TIM COLELLA,
Defendants/CrossClaimants/Cross-Defendants.
APPEARANCES:
COURTNEY ERIN BLACK
JENNIFER ANN BONJEAN
BONJEAN LAW GROUP PLLC
142 Joralemon Street, 5A
BROOKLYN, NY 11201
On behalf of plaintiffs
THOMAS B. REYNOLDS
REYNOLDS, DRAKE, WRIGHT & MARCZYK
29 NORTH SHORE ROAD
ABSECON, NJ 08201
On behalf of Ventnor City, Theodore Bergman, Douglas Biagi,
Michael Miller, Schallus

ROBERT P. MERENICH
GEMMEL, TODD & MERENICH, P.A.
767 SHORE ROAD
P.O. BOX 296
LINWOOD, NJ 08221
On behalf of Egg Harbor Township, James Donaldson, Joseph
Bonsall, Jay Woods, Jason Rzemyk, Dave Druding, Steven
Swankoski, Tim Colella
JAMES T. DUGAN
ATLANTIC COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF LAW
1333 ATLANTIC AVENUE
8TH FLOOR
ATLANTIC CITY, NJ 08401
On behalf of Atlantic County and James Sharkey
HILLMAN, District Judge
In this case involving allegations of constitutional
violations by defendant police officers in connection with the
execution of a “no-knock” search warrant executed at night upon
plaintiffs at their home, presently before the Court is the motion
of plaintiffs to unseal the identities and deposition testimony of
two confidential informants, who purportedly provided the probable
cause for the search warrant; and
Previously, the Court having granted plaintiffs’ request to
take the depositions of the two confidential informants; and
Plaintiffs having deposed the confidential informants, and
that testimony, along with their identities, currently remains
under seal; and
Plaintiffs now requesting that the confidential informants’

2

identities and the transcripts of their depositions be unsealed;
and
Defendants having opposed plaintiffs’ motion; and
The Court having reviewed the deposition transcripts; and
The Court recognizing that “unwarranted disclosure of
government informers poses a very real threat to the continued
vitality of the principle” of the informer’s privilege, Cashen v.
Spann, 334 A.2d 8, 15 (N.J. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 829
(1975); but
The Court also recognizing that where the disclosure of a
confidential informant’s identity is “is essential to a fair
determination of a cause, the privilege must give way,”

Roviaro v.

United States, 353 U.S. 53, 61 (1957); and
The Court having previously balanced the competing interests,
as set forth in Cashen, when allowing plaintiffs to take the
depositions of the confidential informants; and
The Court again considering those interests with regard to
plaintiffs’ current request to unseal the identities of the
confidential informants and the content of their deposition
testimony in order to support their claims;
Consequently,
IT IS HEREBY on this

13th

day of June, 2012

ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion to unseal [133, 134] is
GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, as follows:

3

1.

The deposition transcripts of the two confidential
informants shall be unsealed, except that
a.

The names and any other identifying information of
the two informants shall be redacted and remain
under seal,1 and

b.

The testimony of CI2 regarding prior cooperation
with law enforcement unrelated to this case shall be
redacted and remain under seal.

2.

The determination of whether the confidential informants’
identities will remain sealed for purposes of trial will
be determined in pretrial hearings should the case
proceed to trial.

s/ Noel L. Hillman
At Camden, New Jersey

NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.

1

The parties are directed to meet or confer and to agree on
redacted transcripts consistent with the terms of this Order.
4