Johnson v. Reed et al

Filing 52

ORDER: Defendants have submitted certain documents relating to civilian complaints made against the Police Officer Defendants for in camera review. I ruled on August 3, 2020, that certain documents were to be produced to Plaintiff, and that other do cuments would not be required to be produced. I also directed Defendants' counsel to produce certain pages missing from three of those reports, the ones made by Rosado, Bruen and Ronne. Counsel was able to produce the missing page from the Bruen and Ronne complaints and review by the Court leads to the conclusion that they do not need to be produced to Plaintiff. However, counsel has been unable to locate the missing page from the Rosado complaint. Although requiring Defendants to produce t he documents in question will open the door to likely irrelevant inquiry by Plaintiff, I cannot ignore the absence of complete production to the Court. Either the Police Department or counsel have apparently lost the page or pages between the front & quot;Intra Agency Memo" dated December 4, 2012, and the signature page. The pages are not numbered, so the Court cannot know how many pages are missing. Numerous documents are attached to the Memo as exhibits, and those documents appear to be co mplete. Nevertheless, without the complete "Intra Agency Memo" the Court is unable to complete its in camera review sufficiently to conclude that the document should not be produced in discovery. This information, in theory, may be relevant to the credibility of Officer Reed, a Defendant in the case. Because those responsible for preparing and maintaining files, including files containing civilian complaints, failed to do their job in this case, I am requiring the entire document to be produced to Plaintiff, including the exhibits. Names other than "PO Reed" or "PO Kyle Reed" or "Mr. Rosado" or "M.[redact remainder of first name] Rosado," also spelled "Rosdao," are to be redacted; addresses, dates of birth, and phone numbers are to be redacted. The redacted documents are to be produced to Plaintiff within 14 days of the date of entry of this Order. This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 9/29/2020) (kv)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------- x
CARL JOHNSON,

:

Plaintiff,

:

-against-

:

KYLE REED, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER
17 Civ. 8620 (NSR) (LMS)

:
:

---------------------------------------------------------x
Defendants have submitted certain documents relating to civilian complaints made
against the Police Officer Defendants for in camera review. I ruled on August 3, 2020, that
certain documents were to be produced to Plaintiff, and that other documents would not be
required to be produced. I also directed Defendants' counsel to produce certain pages missing
from three of those reports, the ones made by Rosado, Bruen and Ronne. Counsel was able to
produce the missing page from the Bruen and Ronne complaints1 and review by the Court leads
to the conclusion that they do not need to be produced to Plaintiff. However, counsel has been
unable to locate the missing page from the Rosado complaint. Although requiring Defendants to
produce the documents in question will open the door to likely irrelevant inquiry by Plaintiff, I
cannot ignore the absence of complete production to the Court. Either the Police Department or
counsel have apparently lost the page or pages between the front "Intra Agency Memo" dated
1

The Court expresses concern that counsel submitted incomplete records to the Court
for the Court's review in the first instance. It may be that counsel simply delegated
responsibility to gather the records and never looked at them before having them provided to the
Court. Whatever actually happened was sloppy, at best, and potentially sanctionable, at worst, if
the Court found that the omission was intentional. In this instance I do not find it to have been
intentional, but if it was the result of sloppy work, then counsel should take pains in future to
make sure that the error is not repeated when submitting documents to the Court for in camera
review.

December 4, 2012, and the signature page. The pages are not numbered, so the Court cannot
know how many pages are missing. Numerous documents are attached to the Memo as exhibits,
and those documents appear to be complete. Nevertheless, without the complete "Intra Agency
Memo" the Court is unable to complete its in camera review sufficiently to conclude that the
document should not be produced in discovery. This information, in theory, may be relevant to
the credibility of Officer Reed, a Defendant in the case. Because those responsible for preparing
and maintaining files2, including files containing civilian complaints, failed to do their job in this
case, I am requiring the entire document to be produced to Plaintiff, including the exhibits.
Names other than "PO Reed" or "PO Kyle Reed" or "Mr. Rosado" or "M.[redact remainder of
first name] Rosado," also spelled "Rosdao," are to be redacted; addresses, dates of birth, and
phone numbers are to be redacted. The redacted documents are to be produced to Plaintiff
within 14 days of the date of entry of this Order.
This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.
Dated: September 29, 2020
White Plains, New York
SO ORDERED

_______________________________
Lisa Margaret Smith
United States Magistrate Judge
Southern District of New York

2

The failure is particularly egregious because a police department has responsibility to
safeguard and properly store evidence; it is hoped that evidence of criminal activity is handled
with more care than was this civilian complaint.