DeFranco et al v. The Town of Irondequoit et al

Filing 60

ORDER denying plaintiffs' 57 Motion for Reconsideration. To the extent the plaintiff has other issues relating to the scope of discovery, those matters should be raised with Magistrate Judge Payson who is charged with supervising such discovery. Signed by Hon. David G. Larimer on 1/20/12. (EMA)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_______________________________________________
MICHAEL A. DEFRANCO and
MICHELLE ENGELR,

Plaintiffs,
DECISION AND ORDER
06-CV-6442L
v.
THE TOWN OF IRONDEQUOIT, et al.,

Defendants.
________________________________________________
By decision and order entered in November 2009 (Dkt. #50), this Court affirmed Magistrate
Judge Payson’s decision (Dkt. #40) denying plaintiffs’ request to compel disclosure of the identity
of a confidential informant who provided information which was contained in an application for a
search warrant.
Now, two years after this Court’s decision, plaintiffs move (Dkt. #57) for “relief” from the
Court’s prior decision of November 16, 2009 (Dkt. #50). In essence, the motion is one for
reconsideration.
Plaintiffs’ motion (Dkt. #57) is in all respects denied. To the extent the plaintiff has other
issues relating to the scope of discovery, those matters should be raised with Magistrate Judge
Payson who is charged with supervising such discovery.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________________________________
DAVID G. LARIMER
United States District Judge
Dated: Rochester, New York
January 20, 2012.