Johnson v. Doty
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:15-cv-07823
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Johnson v. Doty, Judge McCarthy ordered Officer Kitt to disclose relevant jail records and grievances in Johnson’s religious-rights case.
Larry Johnson received an order requiring the only remaining defendant, Officer Matthew Kitt, to produce specified logbook entries and relevant grievances. Other inmates’ personal identifying information was to be redacted, and Kitt could raise specific, supported security concerns with the court.
What happened
Larry Johnson, who represented himself, sued under a federal civil-rights law, claiming that officials at Westchester County Jail canceled or interfered with the Muslim Eid-ul-Adha service. Officer Matthew Kitt was the only remaining defendant, and Johnson asked the court to require additional discovery.
Kitt argued that redactions were needed to protect jail security and other inmates’ privacy. The court found relevant logbook entries concerning religious-service scheduling and events that may have interfered with the Islamic ceremony, along with grievances alleging similar conduct by Kitt. It stated that privacy concerns could be addressed by removing identifying information and that Kitt had not provided a specific official statement supporting the security objections.
Judge Judith C. McCarthy ordered Kitt to produce the specified logbook entries and the relevant grievances by March 27, 2020, with identifying information about other inmates redacted. A grievance already produced did not have to be produced again.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. Doty · No. 7:15-cv-07823
- Kenneth Karas
- Mar. 16, 2020
Background
Larry Johnson brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for constitutional-rights violations by state or local officials. Johnson, who was proceeding without a lawyer, alleged that the defendants canceled or interfered with the Muslim Eid-ul-Adha service while he was incarcerated at Westchester County Jail. Father Paul, Imam John Nashid, Warden Doty, and Warden R. Orlando had been dismissed. Officer Matthew Kitt was the only remaining defendant.
Johnson moved to compel Kitt to provide discovery and interrogatory responses in full. The court ordered Kitt to submit unredacted documents for private court review and to review disciplinary records for complaints or grievances concerning religious services from 2010 through 2014.
Discovery standard
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b), discovery may cover nonprivileged information relevant to a party’s claim or defense and proportionate to the needs of the case. Information is relevant when it could make an important fact more or less likely. The court applied that standard to the documents submitted for private review.
Logbook entries
The court found two categories of logbook entries relevant to Johnson’s claims: entries about the timing or scheduling of other religious services when Kitt was on duty, and entries about events that may have overlapped with or interfered with the scheduled Islamic ceremony while Kitt was on duty. The court found that these records could help show whether Kitt arbitrarily canceled the Eid-ul-Adha service and whether his conduct reflected a deliberate campaign against the Islamic faith.
The court directed Kitt to produce, in addition to entries already produced, all entries during specified time periods on October 5, August 29, September 5, September 12, and September 26, 2014, when Kitt was on duty or post. Kitt could notify the court by March 20, 2020, if the court had inadvertently ordered disclosure of information involving security concerns that were not apparent to it. Such a notification had to include an affidavit from an appropriate Westchester County Jail official stating specific facts supporting the security claim. Kitt also had to redact personal identifying information about other inmates.
Grievances
The court reviewed grievances and request slips filed by Johnson and other inmates alleging that Kitt canceled or interfered with the Islamic service or acted discriminatorily toward the Islamic faith. The court found these documents relevant for the same reasons as the logbook entries and directed Kitt to produce them. If one grievance had already been produced with the logbook partially redacted, Kitt did not have to produce it again.
Ruling
The order directed Kitt to produce the relevant logbook entries and all relevant grievances to Johnson by March 27, 2020, subject to redaction of other inmates’ personal identifying information. This was a discovery ruling; the order did not decide whether Johnson ultimately proved his constitutional claims.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.