ford v pittsburgh order imposing sanctions

2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA LEON D. FORD, Plaintiff, vs. CITY OF PITTSBURGH; POLICE OFFICER DAVID DERBISH; POLICE OFFICER MICHAEL KOSKO and POLICE OFFICER ANDREW MILLER, Defendants. POLICE OFFICER DAVID DERBISH; POLICE OFFICER MICHAEL KOSKO and POLICE OFFICER ANDREW MILLER, Cross-Claim Plaintiffs, vs. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CITY OF PITTSBURGH, ) Cross-Claim Defendant. ) Civil Action No. 13-1364 Chief Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly Re: ECF No. 141 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND NOW, this 29th day of September, 2015, upon consideration ofthe Plaintiffs Motion for the Imposition of Sanctions against the City of Pittsburgh, ECF No. 141, in regards to the deposition of Chief Cameron S. McLay of the City of Pittsburgh Bureau of Police; and the response in opposition filed by the Defendants, ECF No. 145, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Sanctions is GRANTED. At the outset, the Court notes that the only day that counsel for the City of Pittsburgh stated that Chief McLay was available all day was September 24, 2015. ECF No. 141-1. As such, even though it was the day after Yom Kippur, Plaintiff scheduled the deposition for that date. Case 2:13-cv-01364-MPK Document 148 Filed 09/29/15 Page 1 of 2

Upload: tenthousanddepositionscom

Post on 08-Dec-2015

18 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

DESCRIPTION

The city of Pittsburgh was fined for repeatedly cancelling depositions and for its witness' decision to leave the deposition early.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Ford v Pittsburgh Order Imposing Sanctions

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LEON D. FORD, Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY OF PITTSBURGH; POLICE OFFICER DAVID DERBISH; POLICE OFFICER MICHAEL KOSKO and POLICE OFFICER ANDREW MILLER,

Defendants.

POLICE OFFICER DAVID DERBISH; POLICE OFFICER MICHAEL KOSKO and POLICE OFFICER ANDREW MILLER,

Cross-Claim Plaintiffs,

vs.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CITY OF PITTSBURGH, ) Cross-Claim Defendant. )

Civil Action No. 13-1364 Chief Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly

Re: ECF No. 141

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

AND NOW, this 29th day of September, 2015, upon consideration ofthe Plaintiffs

Motion for the Imposition of Sanctions against the City of Pittsburgh, ECF No. 141, in regards to

the deposition of Chief Cameron S. McLay of the City of Pittsburgh Bureau of Police; and the

response in opposition filed by the Defendants, ECF No. 145, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that

the Motion for Sanctions is GRANTED.

At the outset, the Court notes that the only day that counsel for the City of Pittsburgh

stated that Chief McLay was available all day was September 24, 2015. ECF No. 141-1. As

such, even though it was the day after Yom Kippur, Plaintiff scheduled the deposition for that

date.

Case 2:13-cv-01364-MPK Document 148 Filed 09/29/15 Page 1 of 2

Page 2: Ford v Pittsburgh Order Imposing Sanctions

Second, during the Telephone Discovery Conference on September 15,2015, this Court

was very clear with all counsel that the pattern of last minute cancellations of depositions by the

City of Pittsburgh would not be tolerated. ECF No. 133.

Third, the testimony of Chief McLay that he understood that he only needed to make

himself available for a three hour window for a deposition is disconcerting at best, given that

notice of deposition only listed a start time of 10:00 a.m. Further, it is not up to defense counsel

to decide the amount of time that will be permitted for a critical deposition noticed by Plaintiff.

For the reasons set forth herein, this Court orders the following:

1) Defendants are directed to produce Chief McLay for a full day of deposition by

October 13,2015.

2) The City of Pittsburgh is ordered to pay all court reporter and videographer costs for

the portion of the deposition of Chief McLay on September 24, 2015.

3) The City of Pittsburgh is ordered to issue a check to Rabner Law Offices, P.C. in the

amount of$100.00 for the cost of the conference room rental on September 24,2015.

4) Further obstructive conduct or early termination of depositions by Defendants may be

subject to more serious Court sanctions.

BY THE COURT:

cc: All Counsel of Record Via CM-ECF

Case 2:13-cv-01364-MPK Document 148 Filed 09/29/15 Page 2 of 2