Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Melino v. Totten

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


August 10, 2010

JOSEPH MELINO, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WILLIAM TOTTEN, PHILIP ABITABLE, PAULETTE MILLER; LOYCE DUKE, FRANCIS CARUSO, PAUL CUSHMAN; AND DEBRA JOY, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Glenn T. Suddaby, United States District Judge

ORDER

Currently before the Court in this prisoner civil rights action, filed by Joseph Melino ("Plaintiff") against the seven above-captioned employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services ("Defendants"), is Defendants' motion to quash Plaintiff's trial subpoenas for Defendants' personal financial information, and Plaintiff's trial subpoenas for two nonparty witnesses (specifically, Deputy Commissioners Donald Selsky and Israel Rivera). (Dkt. No. 74.) After carefully considering the parties' motion papers (Dkt. Nos. 74, 88), and the oral arguments they made to the Court on August 6, 2010, the Court grants Defendants' motion to the extent it requests the quashing of Plaintiff's trial subpoenas for Defendants' personal financial information. However, the Court denies the remainder of Defendants' motion as unsupported by a showing of cause based on the current record.*fn1

The Court hastens to add that this Order in no way precludes Defendants from making objections at trial that, even if the proffered testimony of Deputy Commissioners Selsky and Rivera is relevant under Fed. R. Evid. 401, the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, and/or misleading the jury substantially outweighs the bulk of that testimony under Fed. R. Evid. 403. Of particular concern to the Court is the extent to which the proffered testimony in question is not based on the witness's personal knowledge, and/or invades the province of the jury as the determiner of ultimate facts.

ACCORDINGLY, it is

ORDERED that Defendants' motion to quash Plaintiff's trial subpoenas is (Dkt. No. 78) GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as stated above.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.