IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
April 18, 2012
JOHN ANDERSON, PLAINTIFF,
JAMES GOGA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Cathy Bissoon
Defendant's Motion to Compel (Doc. 39) the deposition testimony of Assistant District Attorney Jennifer DiGiovanni will be granted.
Ms. DiGiovanni's counsel relies on cases interpreting Pennsylvania's
statute regarding the expungement of criminal records. See Doc. 41 at
2-5. As one of those cases recognizes, the purpose of expungement is
to mitigate the "difficulties and hardships that can result from [a
charged person's] having an arrest on file." See U.S. v. Rana, 2007 WL
2791421, *2 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 24, 2007) (citation omitted). Given that
Plaintiff himself does not assert an expungement objection,*fn1
the Court doubts that Ms. DiGiovanni has standing to invoke
the expungement statute as a basis for declining to answer discovery.
Even assuming the contrary, the Court finds that, under the
circumstances presented, Plaintiff's assertion of Section 1983 claims
based on the criminal charges that were expunged, along with his
counsel's statements to the press regarding Plaintiff's claims,
warrants a finding of waiver regarding the expungement objection.
Finally, Plaintiff's relevancy objections are overruled as inconsistent with the liberal standards of discovery applicable under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,*fn2 and Defendants' suggestion that Plaintiff's acquisition of expungement constitutes spoliation is rejected.
Consistent with the foregoing, Defendant's Motion to Compel (Doc. 39) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Cathy Bissoon United States District Judge
cc (via ECF email notification): All Counsel of Record