Dekany v. City of Akron, Ohio et al

Filing 166

Order denying Plaintiff's Motion for a protective order (Related Doc # 146 ). Plaintiff shall provide Defendants with the unredacted mental health records by no later than June 16, 2017. Judge John R. Adams on 6/14/17.(L,J)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ALEXIS DEKANY, Plaintiff, -vsCITY OF AKRON, et al., Defendants. ) CASE NO. 5:16CV1829 ) ) JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS ) ) ) ) ORDER ) ) ) Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Alexis Dekany’s motion for a protective order. Doc. 146. Within her motion, Dekany seeks to avoid disclosing certain mental health records. Specifically, Dekany contends that the records are protected by Fed. R. Evid. 412 and Ohio’s Rape Shield Law. Defendants have opposed the motion. Dekany’s motion is DENIED. First, Rule 412 deals with the admissibility of evidence. As such, Dekany cannot rely upon it to prevent discovery of the information. Moreover, even if Rule 412 were applicable at this stage of the proceedings, it only prohibits admission of evidence “offered to prove that a victim engaged in other sexual behavior” or “offered to prove a victim's sexual predisposition.” As this Court has previously noted, the evidence sought by Defendants is tied directly to Dekany’s allegations of damages related to emotional distress. As such, there is no indication that any Defendant will seek to introduce the information for an improper purpose. Should such an attempt occur, the Court would rely on Rule 412 to prevent use of these records in that manner. Accordingly, Dekany’s motion for a protective order is DENIED. Unredacted versions of the records at issue shall be provided to Defendants by no later June 16, 2017. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 14, 2017 /s/ John R. Adams_______________ JOHN R. ADAMS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?