X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=46095 Magistrate Judge Pollak DEFENDANTS’ COUNSEL submitted copies of redacted and unredacted documents for in camera review by the court, claiming that the redacted portions contain privileged information and are beyond the scope of the court’s previous order. In that order, the court had directed defendants to produce records relating to the conditions of confinement at Brooklyn Central Booking from 1999 to 2001, as well as training logs for the same period. The majority of the documents were redacted under the guise of the deliberative process privilege. The court determined that the majority of redactions at issue relate not to recommendations on policy issues but rather contain certain factual information that may arguably be relevant to the issues in this case, namely the conditions of the facilities in which people are housed at Brooklyn Central Booking. The court also found that while two documents contain redactions that may be protected by the privilege, they are irrelevant to the litigation.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.