Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_19-cv-00290/USCOURTS-azd-4_19-cv-00290-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Greg Moore, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. 

Sean Garnand, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-19-00290-TUC-RM (LAB)

ORDER 

Plaintiffs Greg and Patricia Moore initiated this action on May 24, 2019. (Doc. 1.) 

On September 24, 2019, Defendants filed a Motion asserting the law enforcement 

investigatory privilege over Tucson Police Department (“TPD”) files related to the TPD’s 

criminal investigation of Plaintiffs. (Doc. 23.) Both Magistrate Judge Leslie A. Bowman 

and this Court found that the law enforcement investigatory privilege was applicable 

(Docs. 74, 113), but this Court noted that application of that privilege did “not permit 

Defendants to indefinitely delay discovery in this case,” and that “[a] civil litigant has a 

right to a reasonably prompt determination of her claims.” (Doc. 113 at 12-13 (internal 

quotation marks omitted).)

In an Order filed on November 29, 2021, the Court noted that Defendants have 

had a lengthy period of time to complete their investigation of Plaintiffs, and it warned 

Defendants that it was considering requiring disclosure under a protective order of 

relevant matters previously shielded by the law enforcement investigatory privilege. 

(Doc. 304 at 7.) Before doing so, the Court allowed Defendants to deliver for in camera

Case 4:19-cv-00290-RM-MAA Document 306 Filed 12/13/21 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

review a supplement regarding the status of their investigation. (Id.)

The Court has reviewed Defendants’ ex parte supplement regarding the status of 

their investigation. Given the information contained in that supplement, and the length of 

time that Defendants’ investigation and this action have been pending, the Court finds 

that the balance of the potential benefits and disadvantages of disclosure has changed, 

and that disclosure under a protective order of relevant matters previously shielded by the 

law enforcement investigatory privilege is now appropriate.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that application of the law enforcement investigatory privilege 

to TPD files related to TPD’s investigation of Plaintiffs is lifted. The parties shall engage 

in personal consultation with one another to develop a stipulated protective order for 

purposes of disclosure of matters previously shielded by the law enforcement 

investigatory privilege. Any motion for entry of protective order shall be filed within 

thirty (30) days and will be referred to Magistrate Judge Bowman for resolution. This 

case remains referred to Magistrate Judge Bowman for all pretrial proceedings and 

Report and Recommendation.

Dated this 10th day of December, 2021.

Case 4:19-cv-00290-RM-MAA Document 306 Filed 12/13/21 Page 2 of 2