District Court of New Jersey Requires Production of Surveillance Video Prior to Plaintiff's Deposition - Gardner v. Norfolk Southern Corporation
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Per the NJ Law Journal:
"A defendant in a personal injury case must turn over surveillance video to plaintiffs prior to deposing them, despite the objection that disclosure would defeat the footage's impeachment value.
"U.S. Magistrate Judge Ann Marie Donio's April 17 ruling, denying a protective order to Conrail, appears to be one of first impression in the District of New Jersey.
"Because the surveillance materials directly relate to the plaintiffs' physical condition, they have a substantive value in the case that goes beyond using them for impeachment and thus, permitting the delay sought by the defense 'would nullify the discovery process,' Donio wrote in Gardner v. Norfolk Southern Corporation.
"'Fairness concerns weigh against the kind of sandbagging involved when the moving party sets up grounds for impeachment by using undisclosed materials in an attempt to manufacture inconsistencies.'"
Full article after the jump...
"A defendant in a personal injury case must turn over surveillance video to plaintiffs prior to deposing them, despite the objection that disclosure would defeat the footage's impeachment value.
"U.S. Magistrate Judge Ann Marie Donio's April 17 ruling, denying a protective order to Conrail, appears to be one of first impression in the District of New Jersey.
"Because the surveillance materials directly relate to the plaintiffs' physical condition, they have a substantive value in the case that goes beyond using them for impeachment and thus, permitting the delay sought by the defense 'would nullify the discovery process,' Donio wrote in Gardner v. Norfolk Southern Corporation.
"'Fairness concerns weigh against the kind of sandbagging involved when the moving party sets up grounds for impeachment by using undisclosed materials in an attempt to manufacture inconsistencies.'"
Full article after the jump...