Sanders v. Madison Square Garden, L.P. et al Doc.

46
Case 1:06-cv-00589-GEL-DCF Document 46 Filed 04/05/2007 Page 1 of 3

IDoCURiiE>d
EI,ECrRONiCALTJJ FILED

I Plaintiff, 06 Civ. 589 (GEL) (DF)

-against- ORDER

MADISON SQUARE GFRDEN, L.P., et al.,

------------------------'-----,---------------------
I
I Defendants.
X

DEBRA FREEMAN, qnited States Magistrate Judge.

I

By letter dated 4 r i l 2 , 2 0 0 7 , Defendants have requested (a) an opportunity to inspect the

I

original pages of plainti@ s journal that Plaintiff has produced in discovery in photocopied form,
~
P
and (b) that the Court or er Plaintiffs counsel to produce, in response to a subpoena to counsel,

I4
copies of bills from, and checks issued to, the accountant (Leon Reimer) who prepared Plaintiffs

amended 2003 and 200 tax returns. The Court has considered all parties' positions with respect

to these disputes, which are resolved as follows:

I

1.
P
With res ect to Plaintiffs journal, the Court notes that, as a general matter, it is

~
reasonable for a party to be afforded an opportunity to review original documents, and the Court

appreciates that, as an accommodation to Plaintiffs assertion of burden, Defendants have

I

already agreed to forega/ viewing the originals of journal pages that Plaintiff produced in
I
redacted form. onet the less, Plaintiff credibly asserts that arranging for Defendants to review
I

the remainder of the prokluced journal, while protecting pages that should not be viewed, will
~
still be burdensome. Fupher, although Defendants contend that "it is critical for Defendants to

be able to inspect the original for possible obliteration or alteration," they have offered

Dockets.Justia.com
 Case 1:06-cv-00589-GEL-DCF Document 46 Filed 04/05/2007 Page 2 of 3

absolutely no reason for the Court to believe that any pages of the journal have actually been

obliterated or altered. ~ b c o r d i n ~the

l ~Court
, hereby dictates the following compromise: As to

journal pages that were produced without redaction (or where the redaction was made upon

Defendants' own reques$, Defendants may now designate up to 100 of those pages that they

would like to view in original form,' and Plaintiff shall make those pages available for
I

inspection, in any manndr that will reasonably ensure that Defendants are not afforded access to

pages that were redacted or withheld fkom production. This number of pages should be

sufficiently large to protqct against any concern that Defendants may have that, by designating

selected pages for revie+, they will be revealing any strategy or mental impressions regarding

1
this evidence. If, after v ewing the designated pages, Defendants can articulate a reasonable

basis for questioning theauthenticity of any journal entries, and therefore wish to view

additional pages in origi@l form, they shall set out for the Court the basis for their concern as to

authenticity, and the Co rt will consider extending the scope of the permitted review.
9
2. With resppct to the subpoena to the Vladeck firm, and consistent with this Court's
I

1
prior Order of February 6,2007, the firm need not produce any bills or checks that do not make

1
any reference to the mat ers at issue - i.e., the existence of any side business in which Plaintiff

may have been engaged buring the period of her employment with Defendant Madison Square

Garden, L.P., or any business deductions that may have been taken by Plaintiff on her tax

returns. Absent any sucq reference, Defendants have not adequately established the relevance of

' The Court undelstands that the photocopies of Plaintiffs journal that were produced
included two journal pa on each photocopied page. Where the Court refers herein to "journal
pages," it means journal pages; thus this Order is not intended to permit Defendants to
designate 200 journal pages for review.
 Case 1:06-cv-00589-GEL-DCF Document 46 Filed 04/05/2007 Page 3 of 3

the subpoenaed docume@tsto the claims or defenses asserted in this action. Indeed, even with

such reference, this evidbnce appears to be marginally relevant, at best.

Dated: New York, N e 4 York

April 5,2007

SO ORDERED

DEBRA FREEMAN
United States Magistrate Judge

Copies to:

Anne C. Vladeck, Esq.

Kevin T. Mintzer, Esq.

1501 Broadway, Suite 8 0

New York, NY 10036
",
Vladeck, Waldman, Eli s & Engelhard, P.C.

Teresa M. Holland, Esq.i

Bany A. Cozier, Esq. 1

Ronald M. Green, Esq. I

Epstein Becker & Greeq, P.C.

250 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10177

L. Peter Parcher , Esq.

0. Peter Shenvood, Esq.
Lisa G. Honvitz, Esq. ,
Manatt, Phelps & Phillids
7 Times Square
New York, NY 10036 1