Schoolcraft v. The City Of New York et al

Filing 225

DECLARATION of Suzanna Publicker Mettham in Support re: 223 MOTION to Compel Graham Rayman to Produce Documents.. Document filed by Christopher Broschart(Tax Id. 915354 in his official capacity), Christopher Broschart(Tax Id. 915354 Individually), Timothy Caughey(Tax Id. 885374 Individually), Timothy Caughey(Tax Id. 885374 in his official capacity), Kurt Duncan(Shield No. 2483, Individually), Kurt Duncan(Shield No. 2483 in his official capacity), William Gough(Tax Id. 919124, Individually), William Gough(Tax Id. 919124, in his Official Capacity), Thomas Hanley(Tax Id. 879761, in his Official Capacity), Thomas Hanley(Tax Id. 879761, Individually), Elise Hanlon(in her official capacity as a lieutenant with the New York City Fire Department), Elise Hanlon(individually), Shantel James(Shield No. 3004 in his official capacity), Shantel James(Shield No. 3004 Individually), Theodore Lauterborn(Tax Id. 897840 in his official capacity), Theodore Lauterborn(Tax Id. 897840, Individually), Michael Marino, Michael Marino, Gerald Nelson(Assistant Chief Patrol Borough Brooklyn North, Tax Id. 912370 in his official capacity), Gerald Nelson(Assistant Chief Patrol Borough Brooklyn North, Tax Id. 912370, Individually), Robert W. O'Hare(Tax Id. 916960, Individually), Robert W. O'Hare(Tax Id. 916960, in his Official Capacity), Frederick Sawyer(Shield No. 2576 in his official capacity), Frederick Sawyer(Shield No. 2576, Individually), Timothy Trainer(Tax Id. 899922, in his Official Capacity), Timothy Trainer(Tax Id. 899922, Individually), Richard Wall, Sondra Wilson(Shield No. 5172, in her Official Capacity), Sondra Wilson(Shield No. 5172, Individually). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L, # 13 Exhibit M, # 14 Exhibit N, # 15 Exhibit O)(Mettham, Suzanna)

EXHIBIT F

yonr
Law Dnp¡,RTMENT
THe Clry oF NEW

MICHAEL A. CARDOZO
Corporalion Counsel

SUZANNA P, METTHAM

CHURCH STREET
NEW YORK, NEW YORK IOOOT
IOO

Ass

islant Corpora

I

Fax:

Nathaniel Smith
Attorney for Plaintiff
111 Broadway, Suite 1305
New York, New York 10006

l0

on Counse

I

(2t2) 7BB-9776

September 17,2013

Re:

i

E-mail: [e-mail] gov
Phone: (2 t2) 356-2372

craft v.
Citv of N ew York et al.
600s (Rws)

cv

Dear Counsel:

In compliance with the good faith obligations of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, City Defendants hereby identify the followin! d"fi"i.ncies
with respect to plaintifls
Responses to Defendant's First and Second Requests foì Production
of Documents. It has been
Voice reporter Graham Rayman,s recently
eferences myriad documents which City
overy requests in this matter, and have not
demand that plaintiff comply with his obligations
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e) and immediatély produce
the requested documents,
and any other documents responsive to City Defendants' Interrogatories
and Requests for
Documents not already produced.

"Ter-Page single-spaced Ac.ount schoolcraft hi-s"lf wrote"
On page l4l of The NypD
hospital documents, there is no independen
single-spaced account Schoolcraft hlmself
which is clearly responsive to a number of City I
not limited to Document Requests Nos. I_2, 6,
Documents. city Defendants demand that plaintiff immediately produce
this
T:::ll .ar
qocument.
E-Mails to Repo.te"s. hcludÍng Len Levitt ard Graham Ravmun
Throughout The NypD Tapes, i
Mr, Rayman states that plaintiff sent emails to r
that "detailed the sequence of the previous two
such statements by plaintiff as ,,pay me or f,rre m

are clearly relevant to the claims and defenses of this lawsuit, and responsive to a number of City
Defendants' Document Requests, including, but not limited to Document Request No, 12 of City

Defendants' First Request for Documents and Document Request No. 7 of City Defendants'
Second Request for Documents. City Defendants demand that plaintiff immediately produce any
documents, messages, and communications including but not limited to emails, text messages,
and letters reflecting any communications, interviews, conversations, or meetings plaintiff has
had with any media outlet regarding the allegations of the instant lawsuit, including, but not
limited to blogs, newspapers, radio stations, independent reporters, and magazines.
t'1.000 of Hours of Recordings"

On page 170 of The NYPD Tapes, Mr. Rayman quotes plaintiff as stating that
plaintiff made (and was in possession of) "about 1,000 hours [...of recordings...] Roll calls,
patrol, the locker room, stuff in the station house." City Defendants note that they have not
received anlnuhere near 1,000 hours of recordings from plaintiff. Any recordings made by
plaintiff of his coworkers at the NYPD are clearly relevant to the claims and defenses of this
lawsuit, and responsive to a number of City Defendants' Document Requests, including, but not
limited to Document Request No. l-2, and 137 of City Defendants' First Request for Documents
and Document Requests Nos. 7 of City Defendants' Second Request for Documents, and City
Defendants' letter dated December 19,2012 following up on requests made during the plaintiff s
deposition (31:4-9). City Defendants demand that plaintiff immediately produce any recordings
not previously produced by plaintiff in this matter, in any form or format, relevant to, related to,
or concerning allegations or claims contained in plaintiffls Second Amended Complaint and any
recordings made by plaintiff of any employee of the NYPD.

To the extent plaintiff claims that any responsive document is no longer in
plaintiff s possession, as stated in Paragraph "I" of the "General Notice" that precedes each of
the City Defendants' Discovery Demands, with respect to any document which is responsive to a
document request that was formerly in the possession, custody or control of plaintiff and has
been lost or destroyed, in lieu of each such document, plaintiff should submit a written statement
which (a) describes in detail the nature of the documents and its contents, (b) identifies the
author, (c) specifies the date written or originated, (d) identifies each person to whom the
original or a copy was addressed and/or delivered, (e) identifies every other person who has ever
had possession of the original or a copy of the documents and (f) specifies, if possible, the date
on which the document was lost or destroyed, and if destroyed, the conditions of and reasons for
such destruction, and the person(s) requesting or performing such destruction.
Sincerely yours?

Suzanna Publicker Mettham

n Couns e I
Special Federal Litigation Division

As s is t ant C orporatio

2

cc:

Gregory John Radomisli (By First-Class Mail and E-Mail)
MRRUN CleenwRren & BSLL LLP
Attorneys þr Jamaica Hospital Medical Center
220East 42nd Street l3th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Brian Lee (By First-Class Mail and E-Mail)
IVONE, DEVINE & JENSEN, LLP
Attorneys þr Dr. Isak Isakov
2001 Marcus Avenue, Suite Nl00
Lake Success, New York 11042
Bruce M, Brady (By First-Class Mail and E-Mail)
CALLAN, KOSTER, BRADY & BRENNAN, LLP
Attorneys for Lillian Aldana-Bernier
I 'Whitehall Street
New York, New York 10004

Walter A.Kretz, Jr, (By First-Class Mail and E-Mail)
SEIFF KRETZ & ABERCROMBIE
Attorney for Defendant Mauriello
444Madison Avenue, 30th Floor
New York, NY 10022

J