Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Walsh v. Krantz

December 10, 2008

RORY M. WALSH, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NATURAL GUARDIAN OF C.R.W. AND S.J.W., PLAINTIFF
v.
DR. ROBERT KRANTZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner

MEMORANDUM

Upon the November 12, 2008 referral by Judge Conner (Doc. 100) of the discovery matters presented by the plaintiff, by Order of November 18, 2008 we directed the completion of the plaintiff's deposition and directed further explanation by the plaintiff of the inadequacies found by the plaintiff in the defendants' response to discovery demands of the plaintiff. On November 20, 2008, the plaintiff duly complied. In part, by then, the defendants had provided further responses. In part, the plaintiff cited the absence of responses to certain discovery demands. (Doc. 104).

By Order of November 20, 2008 (Doc. 105) the defendants were directed to respond to the plaintiff's statement of inadequacies. A response was filed on December 2, 2008. (Doc. 108). The plaintiff, at the request of the court, filed a reply on December 7, 2008. (Doc. 111).

The pending claims in this case are those stated in the amended complaint. (Doc. 52). The factual allegations and legal claims stated in the amended complaint are set forth comprehensively in the court's Memorandum and Order of August 22, 2008 (Doc. 72) and will not be repeated herein. The Order of August 22, 2008 establishes that this civil action is proceeding on these claims:

a. Plaintiff's individual claims and claims on behalf of C.R.W. pursuant to the Federal Wiretapping Act (Count I) against defendants Dr. Robert Krantz, an unknown Dallastown staff member, and the Dallastown Area School District.

b. Plaintiff's individual claims pursuant to the Pennsylvania Wiretap Act (Count III) against defendants Dr. Robert Krantz and the unknown Dallastown staff member.

c. Plaintiff's individual claims and claims on behalf of C.R.W. under the Fourth Amendment pursuant to 42U.S.C. § 1983 (Count IV) against defendants Dr. Robert Krantz, an unknown Dallastown staff member, and the Dallastown Area School District.

The Order of August 22, 2008 established a discovery deadline of September 16, 2008. By Order of August 26, 2008, the deadline was continued to December 16, 2008. On November 16, 2008, discovery issues were referred to me for resolution. After obtaining the position of the parties, those issues are addressed herein.

Our determination of these discovery issues will be guided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under Rule 26(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, [p]arties may obtain discovery regarding any non-privileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense-- including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(b)(2)(C).

Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for discovery by way of requests for the production of documents. Rule 34(b)(1)(A) provides that a request "must describe with reasonable particularity each item or category of items to be inspected." The nine requests to defendant Krantz are as follows:

1. That Federal Warrant authorizing you to eavesdrop on any of Plaintiff Walsh's telephone conversations with his son CRW.

2. The roster of administrative assistants on duty and at work on 29 March 06 when you illegally eavesdropped on the telephone conversation between Plaintiff Walsh and CRW. That roster is to clearly annotate those two individuals who answered the telephone during both of Walsh's calls to your school, the first you took in place of CRW, the second you eavesdropped on.

3. A copy of the construction blueprint of the principal's office and administrative offices of the Dallastown Middle School, showing the location of telephone jacks.

4. A purchase order and full description of all telephones at use in your office at the Dallastown Middle School, and as used by each of the administrative persons in the outer administrative offices, detailing make, manufacture, number of phone lines, and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.