Def endants mischar acte rize Mag istrate Judge F acc iola’s ruling as a Repor t and 1 Recommendation. The Memora ndum Opinion and Orde r conc erns a nondispositi ve pre trial m o t i o n , an d

th e r e f o r e i s n o ta

R e p o rtan d

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n . S e e L. C V . R. 72.2. UN I TE D ST AT ES D I STR I CT C OU RT F O R T H E D IS T R IC T O F C O LU M B IA

__________________________________________ ) CHRI STOPHER S ANDERS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 06-1411 ) DI STRI CT OF COLUMBIA, et al., ) ) De fe nd ants
. ) __________________________________________)
MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON AND ORDER T h i s m at t er

i s b ef o re th e C o urt o n

d ef en d an t s ’ o b

j ec t i o n s t o M agi s tra t e J u d ge Fa cciola’ s Fe bruar

y 25, 2009 Memorandum Opinion and O rder and plaintiff’ s opposition there to. Pursuant to L ocal Civil Rule 72.2(c), “ a district judg e may modify or set aside any 1 po rt ion of a ma g istrate jud g e ’s or de r u nd e r t his Rul e fo un d to be c le arl y e rr on e ou s o r c on tr ary

to law. ” De fe nd ants ob

je c t to bo th s e c tio ns of

Ma g istra te Judg e F a c c iol a ’s de c isi on , w hic h f ir st denies de fenda

nts’ asser tion of privileg e as to wr itten communications by and betwe en counse l for the de fenda

nts and the Metropolitan Police De partment’s ( “MPD”) G ener al Counsel’s Off ice and sec ond allows plaintiff to depose the MPD’s Gene ral Counsel, Ter ry Ry an. Ma g istrate Judg e F a c c iol a ’s Me mor and um O pin ion

and Or de r i s n ot c le arl y
e rr on e ou s o r c on tr ary

to l aw; the Court

the re fo re wi ll n ot m od if

y it o r s e t it

a sid e . Se e L .Cv .R. 72 .2 (c ). Th e Court

a g re e s c omp le te ly

wi th M a g istra

te Judg e F a c c iol a ’s ru lin g that de fe nd ants2

have w aived a

ny privileg es that they

could have asser

ted with reg ard to the ne wly discovere d box of docume nts. These doc uments must be produce d. The Court also agree s that it is not ina pp ro pr iate fo r p la int if

f t o d e po se the MPD ’s Ge ne ra l Co un se l, s o lo nga s th e de po sit ion is focuse d, limit ed and doe s not inappropriate ly impinge upon attorney

client or wor

k product privileg e. De positions of opposing counse l are disfavore d, and counse l for plaintiff must kee p the deposition of Mr. Ry an as na rrowly tailored a s possible to avoid eliciting privileg ed te sti mony . T o k e e p p la int if f’ s c ouns e l w ith in p ro pe r b ound s and to a ssu re that de fe nd ants ’
co un s el i s n o to v er l y

aggr es s i v e i nra i s i n g o b

j ec t i o n s —

an d p urs u an tt o M agi s tra t e J u d ge Fa cciola’ s sugg estion to ex pedite re solution of any issues that may

arise dur ing the deposition — counsel shall conduc t the deposition in Magistrate J udg e F acc iola’s jury room on a da

y that he will be available to rule on objec tions. According ly , it is hereby

ORDERED that def

endants’ obje ctions to Mag istrate Judge F acc iola’s Fe bruar y 25 , 2 00 9 M e mor and

um O pin ion

and Or de r [7 2] a

re DENI ED ; it

is F UR TH ER O RD ERE D that de fe nd ants mus t pr od uc e to p la int if

f t he do c ume nts that are the su

bje c t of de fe nd ants ’ d isc ov e ry

mot ion [56] o n o r b e fo re June 19 , 2 00 9; i t is FURTHE R ORDERED that after plaintiff has re viewed the newly produce d do c ume nts , th e pa

rt ie s sh a ll s c he du le the de po sit ion of Mr . Ryan to take pla c e in M a g ist rate Judg e F a c c iol a ’s jur

y ro om a t a tim e c on ve nie nt f

or Ma g ist rate Judg e F a c c iol a . Co un se l f or a ll parties a re e x pecte d to behave profe ssionally during the deposition. SO ORDERED. _/s/_________________________ PAULL . FRI EDMAN DA T E : J un e 9 , 2 0 0 9 Un i t edS t at es Di s tri ct J u d ge