Herrera-Antigua v. The City of New York
- Clarke
- 1:24-cv-04636
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Herrera-Antigua v. City of New York, Judge Clarke unsealed specified surveillance footage for this lawsuit but limited its use to litigation.
The order affects the parties to Herrera-Antigua v. The City of New York and non-parties, including minor residents, whose faces appear in the specified surveillance footage. The footage may be used in the lawsuit but must remain confidential and be used only for prosecuting or defending the plaintiff’s claims.
What happened
Herrera-Antigua v. The City of New York concerns video surveillance footage from two New York City Administration of Children’s Services facilities depicting incidents alleged in the plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint.
The defendants sought to produce footage recorded on seven listed dates. The footage shows non-parties, including minor residents, whose records may be legally protected from disclosure. The court ordered the footage unsealed for use in this civil action.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke also ordered that the footage be treated as confidential and used only to prosecute or defend the plaintiff’s claims in this lawsuit.
The detailed version
- Herrera-Antigua v. The City of New York · No. 1:24-cv-04636
- Clarke
- Feb. 24, 2025
Background
The defendants—the City, Smith, Cortes-Sanon, Philpot, and Tejada—sought to produce video surveillance footage from the New York City Administration of Children’s Services facilities known as Crossroads and Horizons. The footage covers July 19, 2021; October 2, 2021; November 19, 2021; December 15, 2021; December 22, 2021; December 29, 2021; and February 22, 2022. It depicts incidents alleged in the Second Amended Complaint.
The footage portrays non-parties, including minor residents. The proposed order states that the arrest records and later incarceration records of some people shown may be sealed and protected under New York Criminal Procedure Law §§ 160.50 and 160.55 and New York Family Court Act § 375.1. It also states that the footage is material and relevant to the pending civil action.
Ruling
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke ordered that the specified surveillance footage be unsealed and made available for use in this civil action. The court further ordered that any footage unsealed under the order be treated as confidential and used only to prosecute or defend the plaintiff’s claims in the lawsuit.
Classification
This is a procedural order concerning the handling and use of evidence in ongoing civil litigation. It does not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.