Schoolcraft v. The City Of New York et al

Filing 218

LETTER RESPONSE to Motion addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Nathaniel B. Smith dated February 12, 2014 re: 214 LETTER MOTION for Local Rule 37.2 Conference and request to preclude plaintiff from relying upon information which he has failed to provide pursuant to the Court's January 15, 2014 Order addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Ryan G. Shaf. Document filed by Adrian Schoolcraft. (Smith, Nathaniel)

LAW OFFICE OF

NATHANIEL

B.

SMITH

ATTORNEY AT LAW
111 BROADWAY

NEW YORK. NEW YORK 10006
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

NATHANIEL B. SMITH

February 12, 2014
Honorable Robert W. Sweet
United States District Judge
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 1007
Schoolcraft v. The City ofNew York, et al.,
10-cv-6005 (RWS)

Dear Judge Sweet:
I am writing to respond to the City Defendants' January 30, 2014lettermotion, which is on the Court's calendar for submission on February 19, 2014.
The motion should be denied for the reason set forth below.
1. The AEO Production. On January 24, 2014, I sent to all counsel the
plaintiffs supplemental production, marked as AS 10145-10230, in accordance
with the Court order that the emails and other communications received from other
NYPD police officers who shared their experiences at the NYPD or otherwise
responded to the web site created by the plaintiffs prior counsel be produced on an
attomey's-eyes-only basis to protect those police officers from retaliation. A copy
of the transmittal email is attached. To the extent that the City Defendants are
saying that they did not get this email or the attachment, then they should have told
me so, rather than filing this motion without seeking any kind of good faith
resolution of the issue with opposing counsel, as required by the rules. Thus, that
portion of the motion should be denied.
2. The Witness Designation. On January 15,2014, the Court also ordered
that the plaintiff designate 30 days after the production of the above-referenced
unreacted identifying information which, if any, of those police officers the

2
LAW OFFICE OF

NATHANIEL

B.

SMITH

plaintiff wanted to use as witnesses. Thus, the time in which to make that
designation has not passed and the plaintiff is required to make that designation by
February 21, 2014. Accordingly, that portion of the City Defendants' motion
should be denied.
3. The Memos or Other Documents. As noted in the City Defendant's
motion, the plaintiff has not been able to locate the 2006 or 2007 memoranda or
reports requested by the City Defendants. Since the City Defendants do not make
any request for relief with respect to these documents, the Court need not make any
ruling at this time.
4. The Sanctions Request. The City Defendants' sanctions request is
meritless for the reasons noted above and because there is not even any attempt to
seek to establish any grounds for that relief.

Respectfully submitted,

~~
Nathaniel B. Smith

By ECF
All Counsel
(by ECF)

211212014

Gmail- AEO Supplemental Production

'

-:

,-,:

AEO Supplemental Production
Nat Smith <[e-mail]>
Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:37 PM
To: "Gregory J. Radomisli" <[e-mail]>, "Shaffer, Ryan (Law)" <[e-mail]>, "Brian E. Lee"
<[e-mail]>, Walter Kretz <[e-mail]>
Cc: "Mettham, Suzanna (Law)" <[e-mail]>, Matthew Koster <[e-mail]>, Brian
Osterman <[e-mail]>, "lawyers@suckleschlesinger. com" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "Seligman, Rachel A. (Law)"
<[e-mail]>, "Smith-Williams, Qiana (Law)" <[e-mail]>, "Blackman, Duane (Law)"
<[e-mail]>
Counsel, Attached please find plaintiff's supplemental production, bates-stamped AS 10145-10230, which the Court
ordered be produced to you on an attorney's-eyes-only basis on January 15, 2014. If you have any questions, please
give me a call. Thank you.
Nathaniel B. Smith, Esq.
111 Broadway- Suite 1305
New York, New York 10006
212-227-7062 (tel)
212-346-4665 (fax)
[e-mail]
---·--

....

·-·-------·-------------

From: "Gregory J. Radomisli" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:06:28 +0000
To: "'Shaffer, Ryan (Law)"' <[e-mail]>, Nat Smith <[e-mail]>, "'Brian E. Lee'"
<[e-mail]>, 'Walter Kretz' <[e-mail]>
Cc: "Mettham, Suzanna (Law)" <[e-mail]>, 'Matthew Koster' <[e-mail]>,
Brian Osterman <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]
>, "pcallan @ckbblaw.com" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "Seligman,
Rachel A. (Law)" <[e-mail]>, "Smith-Williams, Qiana (Law)" <[e-mail]>,
"Blackman, Duane (Law)" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Del Pozo Deposition

And the day my daughter made "Silvers" in two events at her swim meet in N.C.

Gregory J. Radomisli
Partner
Martin Clearwater & Bell LLP
220 East 42nd Street
New York, New York 10017
Direct: [phone]
hltps://mail.google.cornlmail/uiO/?ui=2&ik=6a5b6b965e&view=pt&q=AEO&qs=true&search=query&th=l43c553a872687ec

116

211212014

Gmail - AEO Supplemental Production

Fax:
[phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
www.mcblaw.com
From: Shaffer, Ryan (Law) [mailto:[e-mail]]

Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 2:01PM
To: 'Nat Smith'; 'Brian E. Lee'; 'Walter Kretz'
Cc: Mettham, Suzanna (Law); Gregory J. Radomisli; 'Matthew Koster'; Brian Osterman;
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; Seligman, Rachel A. (Law); Smith-Williams, Qiana (Law);
Blackman, Duane (Law)
Subject: RE: Del Pozo Deposition

To be clear, your email in which you withdrew the subpoena was sent on Martin Luther
King, Jr. Day. That is a Federal, State, and Local holiday.

From: Nat Smith [mailto:[e-mail]]

Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 1:27PM
To: Shaffer, Ryan (Law); 'Brian E. Lee'; 'Walter Kretz'
Cc: Mettham, Suzanna (Law); 'Gregory J. Radomisli'; 'Matthew Koster'; 'Brian Osterman';
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; Seligman, Rachel A. (Law); Smith-Williams, Qiana (Law);
Blackman, Duane (Law)
Subject: Re: Del Pozo Deposition
Counsel, As already stated, I am reserving the right to re-schedule DelPozo's deposition. It is also incorrect that the
subpoena was "withdrawn with less than one business days' notice. Nat Smith
----·-·-

-

----··

From: "Shaffer, Ryan (Law)" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 17:04:20 +0000
To: "'Brian E. Lee"' <[e-mail]>, 'Walter Kretz' <[e-mail]>, Nat Smith
<[e-mail]>
Cc: "Mettham, Suzanna (Law)" <[e-mail]>, "'Gregory J. Radomisli"' <[e-mail]>,
'Matthew Koster' <[e-mail]>, 'Brian Osterman' <[e-mail]>,
"lawyers @sucklesch lesinger. com" <lawyers@s u cklesch lesinger.com>, "pcallan @ckbblaw. com"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "Seligman, Rachel A. (Law)"
<[e-mail]>, "Smith-Williams, Qiana (Law)" <[e-mail]>, "Blackman, Duane (Law)"
<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Del Pozo Deposition
Counsel:
As Mr. Smith withdrew his subpoena, the deposition will not go forward tomorrow. Moreover, Dl Del Pozo will
not be produced at a later date as plaintiff has waived his right to the deposition by withdrawing the deposition
subpoena with less than one business day's notice.
Thank You,
Ryan G. Shaffer
https:/lmail.google.com/maiilu/OI?ui=2&ik=6a5b6b965e&vicw=pt&q=AEO&qs=true&search=query&th=I43c553a872687ec

216

2/12/2014

Gmail- AEO Supplemental Production

From: Brian E. Lee [mailto:[e-mail]]

Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 11: 58 AM
To: 'Walter Kretz'; 'Nat Smith'
Cc: Mettham, Suzanna (Law); 'Gregory J. Radomisli'; 'Matthew Koster'; 'Brian Osterman'; Shaffer, Ryan (Law);

[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; Seligman, Rachel A. {Law); Smith-Williams, Qiana (Law);
Blackman, Duane (Law)
Subject: RE: Del Pozo Deposition

Cotmsel:
Are we proceeding with this deposition tomorrow? I agree that we all set aside the time for it, and it
is better to get it done now.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Brian E. Lee
Ivane Devine & Jensen, LLP
2001 Marcus A venue
Lake Success, NY II 042
[phone]
Fax [phone]
CellfText [phone]
brianelee@idjlaw .com
Confidentiality Note: This electronic message transmission is intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain information that is privileged or confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. If
you have received this transmission and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying or distribution or use of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
mail in error, please contact me immediately at 516-326-2400 and delete and destroy the original message and all
copies. Thank you.
IRS Circular 230 disclosure: Any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments or
enclosures) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or
matter addressed in this communication. (The foregoing disclaimer has been affixed pursuant to U.S. Treasury
regulations governing tax practitioners.)

From: Walter Kretz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 3:46PM
To: Nat Smith

Cc: Suzanna Pub Iicker Mettham; Gregory J. Radomisli; Brian E. lee; Matthew Koster; Brian Osterman; Ryan
Shaffer; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; ACC Rachel SeligmanWeiss; Smith-Williams, Qiana (law); Blackman, Duane {law)
Subject: Del Pozo Deposition

https://mail .google .corn!mail/u!O/?ui=2&ik= 6a5b6b965e&view= pt&q=A EO&qs= true&se arch=q ue ry&lh= 143c553a872687ec

3/6

2/12/2014

Nat-

Gmail - AEO Supplemental Production

I would

like to proceed with the DelPozo deposition, and ask that the City have him

appear at my office for a deposition on Wednesday. He clearly has knowledge of
information directly relevant to many of the matters at issue and since everyone has
indicated their availability for Wednesday,

I would

like to take his deposition now rather

than later. Thanks- Walter
Walter A. Kretz, Jr.
Scoppetta Seiff Kretz & Abercrombie
444 Madison Avenue, 30th Floor
New York, NY 10022
212-371-4500
212-371-6883 (fax)
[e-mail]
This message is being sent from a Law Firm and may contain CONFIDENTIAL or PRIVILEGED information. If
you are not the intended recipient, do not printout, copy or distribute this message or any attachments. Advise
the sender immediately by reply e-mail, and delete this message and attachments without retaining a copy_

From: Nat Smith [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 3:14PM
To: Walter Kretz
Cc: Suzanna Publicker Mettham; Gregory J. Radomisli; Brian E. Lee; Matthew Koster; Brian Osterman;
Ryan Shaffer; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; ACC Rachel SeligmanWeiss; Smith-Williams, Qiana (Law); Blackman, Duane (Law)
Subject: Withdrawal of Del Pozo Subpoena
Counsel, Please Take Notice that I am withdrawing the subpoena I issued for the DelPozo deposition. Thus, the
deposition will not go forward on the 22nd at my office.
Walter, Regrading your email of earlier today, I will provide a copy ofthe video and request that you provide me with
your requests for documents. I have not seen the deposition transcript and do not know what documents you are
seeking. If you provide me with that, then I will see if a search can be conducted and the results turned over. I object
under any circumstances to any lawyer or party going to the plaintiff's home and will treat any such conduct as
harassment ofthe plaintiff.
Nathaniel B. Smith, Esq.
111 Broadway- Suite 1305
New York, New York 10006
212-227-7062 (tel)
212-346-4665 (fax)
[e-mail]
--------

-

-------

https:l/mail.google .com/maiVu/0/1 ui=2&ik=6a5b6b965e&view= pt&q=AEO&qs=true&search=q uery &th= 143c553a872687ec

416

2/12/2014

Gmail- AEO Supplemental Production

From: Walter Kretz <[e-mail]>

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 201413:48:50 -0500
To: Nat Smith <[e-mail]>

Cc: Suzanna Pub Iicker Mettham <[e-mail]>, "Gregory J. Radomisli" <[e-mail]>,
"Brian E. Lee" <[e-mail]>, Matthew Koster<[e-mail]>, Brian Osterman
<[e-mail]>, Ryan Shaffer <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, ACC Rachel Seligman-Weiss
<[e-mail]>, "Smith-Williams, Qiana (Law)" <[e-mail]>, "Blackman, Duane (Law)"
<d blackma@law. nyc.gov>
Subject: Mauriello deposition video and Larry Schoolcraft documents
Nat- I have received the Mauriello deposition transcript from you for his review and signature, but the
video of hios deposition was not included. I need the video so it can be viewed while reviewing the
transcript and any corrections can be properly and efficiently be made. It also would allow us to
express any objection to the quality of the video itself. Please provide at your earliest convenience.
Also, as we discussed, I would like to arrange for a review of the documents and any other relevant
items Larry Schoolcraft has in storage in his garage or in any other location. Larry indicated in the
immediate afternmath of the events of October 31, 2009, and thereafter has repeated, that he has two
or three copies of anything Adrian had relating to the NYPD. He confirmed this at his deposition and
indicated defendants could make arrangements to review everything he has. When I raised this with
you last week, you expressed objection to any such review being conducted at the site where the
documents are currently stored, which is Larry's home, because it also is the home of Adrian. I am
willing to consider, and I am sure all defendants are willing to consider, any reasonable proposal you
would like to make for us to arrange with Larry to have this review conducted as soon as possible. One
simple idea would be to schedule the review at the house on a date when Adrian plans or can arrange
to be somewhere else, if that is what he prefers. Please advise within the week. Otherwise, we will
make appropriate arrangements directly with Larry, with the intervention of the Northern District if
necessary.
Thanks - Walter
Walter A. Kretz, Jr.
Scoppetta Seiff Kretz & Abercrombie
444 Madison Avenue, 30th Floor
New York, NY 10022
212-371-4500
212-371-6883 (fax)
[e-mail]
This message is being sent from a Law Firm and may contain CONFIDENTIAL or PRIVILEGED information. If
you are not the intended recipient, do not printout, copy or distribute this message or any attachments. Advise
the sender immediately by reply e-mail, and delete this message and attachments without retaining a copy.

No virus found in this message.
https://ma il.google .com/maiVu/0/?ui= 2&ik=6a5b6b965e&view=pt&q=AEO&qs= true &search=que ry &th= 143 c553a872687ec

5/6

211212014

Gmail - AEO Supplemental Production

Checked by AVG- www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4259 /Virus Database: 3681/7017- Release Date: 01/20/14
The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or confidential information, which is intended only
for use of rsh affer@ law. nyc.gov,n atbs mith@ gma i l.co m,b ria n elee@ id j law.com, wa kretz@ seiffkretz.co m,sme
ttha m@ law. nyc.gov ,mkoster@ ck b b law.co m,oster b@ mcb law.com,lawyers@ su cklesch les i nger .com,
[e-mail],[e-mail],[e-mail],[e-mail],bauza.magdalena@
gmail.com,rseligma@ law.nyc.gov,[e-mail],dblackma@ law.nyc.gov. If the reader of this communication is not
the intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient), you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction ofthis communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Thank you.
~

Plaintiff's Supplemental Production AS 10145-10230 .pdf
1603K

I·
I
I

https://mai!.google.com!mail/u/O/?ui=2&ik=6a5b6b965e&view=pt&q=AEO&qs=true&search=query&th=l43c553a872687ec

616