Galgano v. County of Putnam, New York

Background

The order addresses Galgano's letter-motion to compel production of draft documents withheld by Putnam and the individual county defendants on work-product grounds. Work product generally refers to materials prepared by or for attorneys in anticipation of litigation, including attorneys' mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories.

In a prior order, the court had determined that prosecutorial files in a case alleging misconduct connected to a closed criminal investigation could be discoverable when the materials went to the heart of the litigation. But the court had declined to require disclosure of core work product until it ruled on the defendants' motions under Rule 12 and had a clearer understanding of which claims could proceed against which defendants. The earlier motion was denied without prejudice.

Court's analysis

The court stated that the case had progressed beyond preliminary motion practice, the issues had been joined, and full discovery was ongoing. It adhered to its earlier analysis and concluded that there was no longer a basis to delay discovery of work product, including core work product, when the materials went to the heart of the litigation.

The disputed materials included drafts of applications for trap-and-trace orders and search or eavesdropping warrants, as well as drafts of progress reports later submitted to the court concerning those applications. The court found that these documents were work product because attorneys had prepared all or part of them. But the case alleged that false statements appeared in the applications and progress reports. The court found that the drafts could show how and by whom the alleged false statements were inserted into the documents ultimately submitted to the courts. It also found that drafts drafted, edited, or approved by Levy went to the heart of Galgano's claim that Levy was personally involved in spreading the alleged falsehoods.

Ruling

Judge Paul E. Davison granted the motion to compel to the stated extent. The defendants were ordered to produce all drafts of court filings alleged in the Second Amended Complaint to contain false statements and to identify drafts drafted, edited, or approved by Levy. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion.