Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Doe 1, Plaintiff, v. Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, Diocese of Winona, and Thomas Adamson, Defendants. ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO STAY ORDERS PENDING APPEAL
By motions dated February 13, 2014, Defendants have requested stays of recently issued and anticipated discovery orders of this Court while they seek interlocutory relief from the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Plaintiff's opposing papers were filed on February 14, 2014. Defendant Diocese of Winona is represented by Thomas R. Braun, Esq., and Defendant Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis is represented by Stacy E. Ertz, Esq.. Michael G. Finnegan, Esq.. The Court has carefully reviewed the parties' motion papers; has reviewed the file; and, being fully advised, makes the following: Plaintiff Doe 1 is represented by
persuasive legal or factual basis for Defendants' motions and they are, in part, premature. Defendants' relevancy and confidentiality objections to production of post-2004 "accused" priest identities and related information pursuant to the Court's Order of December 3, 2013, have been addressed
Similarly, the
relevancy of facts sought in noticed depositions has been addressed and objections based on legitimate privilege claims are preserved. Finally,
requests to stay orders compelling answers to interrogatories and the production of documents are premature. The Court has these discovery issues under advisement and no order is anticipated until after February 28, 2014. 2. The Court will issue a memorandum containing a more detailed
rationale for its decision herein at a future date if it deems it appropriate to do so.
3.
appropriate means.
Dated: ______________
BY THE COURT:
________________________ John B. Van de North, Jr. Judge of the District Court File No. 62-CV-13-4075