IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
January 28, 2009
RONALD T. WHITAKER, SR., CO-ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF RONALD TAYLOR WHITAKER, JR., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS
SPRINGETTSBURY TOWNSHIP, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Christopher C. Conner United States District Judge
AND NOW, this 28th day of January, 2009, upon consideration of plaintiffs' motion (Doc. 29) for reconsideration and/or clarification of the order of court (Doc. 27) dated November 14, 2008, which denied plaintiffs' oral motion to compel production of the internal investigation memorandum produced by the Springettsbury Township Police Department (the "Laird memorandum"),*fn1 and it appearing that plaintiffs' instant motion (Doc. 29) seeks to compel production of a "supervisor's complaint" that was not the subject of the court's prior discovery order (Doc. 27), and it further appearing that defendants have submitted a copy of the "supervisor's complaint" to the court for in camera review, that the court has carefully reviewed the document, and that the document contains departmental analyses and recommendations nearly identical to those contained in the Laird memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion (Doc. 29) for reconsideration and/or clarification of the order of court (Doc. 27) dated November 14, 2008 is CONSTRUED as a motion to compel production of documents and, for the reasons set forth in the court's memorandum (Doc. 27) of November 14, 2008, plaintiffs' motion is DENIED as so construed.