Schoolcraft v. The City Of New York et al

Filing 414

REPLY AFFIRMATION of NATHANIEL B. SMITH in Support re: 305 MOTION for Summary Judgment .. Document filed by Adrian Schoolcraft. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit)(Smith, Nathaniel)

1

1

2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

------------------------------------------X

ADRIAN SCHOOLCRAFT,
4

PLAINTIFF,
5

-against6
7

8
9

10
11

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Case No:
10-CIV-6005

THE CITY OF NEW YORK, DEPUTY CHIEF MICHAEL
MARINO, Tax id. 873220, Individually and in
his official capacity, ASSISTANT CHIEF
PATROL BOROUGH BROOKLYN NORTH GERALD
NELSON, Tax id. 912370, Individually and in
his Official Capacity, DEPUTY INSPECTOR
STEVEN MAURIELLO, Tax Id. 895117,
Individually and in his official Capacity,
CAPTAIN THEODORE LAUTERBORN, Tax Id.
897840, Individually and in his Official
Capacity, LIEUTENANT JOSEPH GEOFF, Tax Id.
894025, Individually and in his Official
Capacity, Sgt. Frederick Sawyer, Shield No.
2576, Individually and in his Official
Capacity, SERGEANT KURT DUNCPlN, Shield No.
2483, Individually and in his Official
Capacity, LIEUTENANT TIMOTHY CAUGHEY, Tax
Id. 885374, Individually and in his
Official Capacity, SEEGEANT SHANTEL JAMES,
Shield No. 3004, and P.O.'s '1 JOHN DOE"
1-50, Individually and in their Official
Capacity (the name John Doe being
fictitious, as the true names are presently
unknown) (collectively referred to as "NYPD
defendants 11 )
------------------------------------------X

20
21

Date:

September 23, 2014

22

Time :

9 : 2 4 Pl. M.

23
24
25

(DEPOSITION OF ROY LUBIT, M.D., Ph.D.)

DIAMOND REPORTING

(718)

624-7200
1

[e-mail]

18

1

R. LUBIT, M.D.,

2
3

Q.

Ph.D.

Was anybody with you when you

had had interviews with Mr. Schoolcraft?

4

A.

No.

5

Q.

Did you tape-record the

6

interview?

7

A.

No.

8

Q.

Did you videotape the

9

interview?

10

A.

No.

11

Q.

When did you first become

12
13

14
15
16

involved in this case?
A.

I would have to check my

billing records.

Q.

You've written reports like the

one you've g1ven us today before, correct?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q.

And you were aware that when

19

you wrote your report it was to contain a

20

complete opinion regarding the care and

21

treatment rendered to Mr. Schoolcraft,

22

correct?
MR. SMITH:

23
24

A.

Yes.

Objection to form.

Certainly the focus was

I

'·
(

\

25

going to be whether the admission, whether

DIAMOND REPORTING

(718)

624-7200
18

[e-mail]

19
1
2

R. LUBIT, M.D.,

Ph.D.

the commitment was appropriate.

Q.

3

But you were aware that the

4

report was intended to be a complete

5

rendition of your opinion?
MR. SMITH:

6

Objection to form.

7

Q.

Right?

8

A.

As complete as it could be at

9

that Lime. New information becomes

10

available at points. And my opinion then

11

can alter if new information becomes

12

available, which would change that --

13

But at the time,

Q.

Doctor --

14

excuse me.

15

was intended to be a complete opinion,

16

correct?

17

MR. SMITH:

it

Objection; asked

and answered and argumentative.

18
19
20

At the time you wrote it,

You can answer.

A.

A complete opinion as much as I

21

could think of the questions that one might

22

want to ask.

23

There are times when lawyers

24

ask questions that I hadn't thought that

25

they would want to ask,

DIAMOND REPORTING

(718)

624-7200
19

and I may have a

[e-mail]

20

1

R. LUBIT, M.D.,

Ph.D.

2

solid basis for rendering an expert opinion

3

on that question.

4

think of it when I was writing the report

5

on my own doesn't mean that I can't -- that

6

I shouldn't be able to have that other

7

opinion.

8

as I thbught people might want to know.

9
10

Just because I didn't

So I answer as much to my ability

Q.

And when you reviewed the case

were you trying to be objective?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q.

And would your report reflect

13

your objective evaluation?

14

A.

Yes.

15

Q.

You didn't word it 1n a way to

16

help one side?

17

A.

I do not intentionally do that.

18

Q.

Your intention was to render an

19

objective report based on your objective

20

review of everything you told me you

21

reviewed,

correct?

22

A.

Yes.

23

Q.

Now,

24

you have a bias against

involuntary commitment, don't you?

25
DIAMOND REPORTING

MR. SMITH:
(718)

624-7200
20

Objection to form.
[e-mail]

21

1

R. LUBIT, M.D.,

2

A.

Ph.D.

I wouldn't say that I have a

3

bias against it. I have a concern. I have

4

involuntarily committed, in all likelihood,

5

over a thousand people. Two thousand

6

people.

7

Plaintiff's side for when hospitals have

8

failed to commit someone that they should

9

have,

I

have been the expert on the

something terrible happened.

10

I

think that doctors often do

11

not take with adequate seriousness at

12

times,

13

doctors did not take the adequate

14

ser1ousness the important -- the impact of

15

committing someone that there is a very big

16

negative impact to that that one should

17

consider and not take it lightly.

18
19
20

like in this case,

Q.

I

think the

But you agree that your -- you

use the term anti-paternalism, correct?
A.

Yes.
MR. SMITH:

21

Objection to form.

22

Q.

What do you mean by that?

23

A.

That to hospitalize someone

24
',,

''

against their will according to 9.39,

25

according to, you know, police and

DIAMOND REPORTING

( 718)

62 4-7 2 0 0
21

[e-mail]