New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

THOMPSON v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2005-010-057, Claim No. 108000, Motion Nos. M-70592, CM-70701


Synopsis


Issue of fact precludes summary judgment.

Case Information

UID:
2005-010-057
Claimant(s):
NAKIA THOMPSON
Claimant short name:
THOMPSON
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
108000
Motion number(s):
M-70592
Cross-motion number(s):
CM-70701
Judge:
Terry Jane Ruderman
Claimant's attorney:
CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE, LLPBy: Lawrence E. Buterman, Esq.
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER
Attorney General for the State of New York
By: Dian Kerr McCullough, Assistant Attorney GeneralGail Pierce-Siponen, Assistant Attorney General
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
December 6, 2005
City:
White Plains
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

The following papers numbered 1-4 were read and considered by the Court on claimant's motion to compel and defendant's cross-motion for a protective order:
Notice of Motion, Attorney's Affidavit, Memorandum of Law..................................1

Notice of Cross-Motion, Attorney's Affirmation in Opposition and Exhibits.............2

Claimant's Reply Memorandum of Law..................................................................3

Defendant's Reply Affirmation..................................................................................4

Claim No. 108000 alleges that, during claimant's incarceration at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, between February 2002 and August 2002, claimant was repeatedly raped and sexually assaulted by defendant's employee, Correction Officer Rico Meyers. The claim alleges, inter alia, that defendant was negligent in its training and supervision of its employee and in its failure to remove Meyers from employment prior to August 27, 2002, more than six months after he had allegedly began his sexual assaults on claimant.

By letter dated March 14, 2005, claimant requested a complete copy of an ongoing investigation of Meyers regarding allegations which postdate the time period relative to this claim (Claimant's Ex. E to Motion). By letter dated March 18, 2005, defendant objected to the sought after discovery and asserted the public interest privilege (Claimant's Ex. F to Motion). Claimant now moves for an order compelling production of this file and defendant cross-moves for a protective order asserting the public interest privilege, Civil Rights Law 50-a, and Executive Order No. 39.

Defendant persuasively argues in favor of a protective order regarding this ongoing investigation of Officer Meyers by the Department of Correctional Services Office of the Inspector General. Significantly, the investigation is ongoing and postdates the time period alleged in the claim at issue by more than two years. Notably, in addition to the investigative file which pertains to claimant, claimant has been also given access to the files of four other prior investigations of Meyers which do not directly relate to claimant.

Accordingly, upon weighing all the factors, this Court finds that claimant has failed to make the requisite showing to warrant disclosure of an ongoing investigation of Meyers which postdates the allegations of this claim.

Motion DENIED. Cross-motion GRANTED.


December 6, 2005
White Plains, New York

HON. TERRY JANE RUDERMAN
Judge of the Court of Claims