Motion To Compel Production Of Surveillance Evidence

STATE OF SUPERIOR COURT

COUNTY OF _____________________

, )

)

v. ) C.A. No.___________

)

, )

)

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE

Now comes the Plaintiff, , and hereby moves that this Court enter an order compelling the Defendant, , further to identify any surveillance films, evidence or other materials taken of, or depicting or describing or visualizing Plaintiff in the within action.

Plaintiff for grounds of his Motion, states that pursuant to discovery, Plaintiff served Interrogatories and Production Requests on Defendant and requested all information concerning any surveillance films, pictures, videotapes or other materials taken of, or depicting or describing Plaintiff.

In response to the discovery requests, Defendant acknowledged that he had surveillance evidence of Plaintiff, but refused to identify the evidence, to produce it or otherwise to make it available in discovery. Defendant also claimed that the surveillance evidence was protected from discovery on the grounds that it was to be used for impeachment at trial or to rebut testimony and that it was also protected by the attorney work product doctrine. For the reasons stated below, this Court should reject Defendant's arguments and should order full and complete compliance with the discovery rules including providing a description of all surveillance evidence, and full and complete answers to the Interrogatories and Production Requests as required by the Rules.

ARGUMENT

I.

Surveillance Evidence

Is Generally Discoverable.

Most courts have held that surveillance evidence is generally discoverable so long as the defendant is permitted to depose the plaintiff regarding his injuries and disabilities prior to answering interrogatories or producing documents regarding surveillance evidence. Plaintiff's testimony is then memorialized for impeachment purposes, which is the alleged basis for the defense objection to producing the surveillance evidence. Here, Plaintiff's deposition has already been taken by Defendant and Plaintiff has fully answered all of the Defendant's interrogatories concerning the nature and extent of injuries and damages. Additionally, Defendant was allowed to and did question Plaintiff on the accident, the nature of the injuries, any limitations or disabilities resulting therefrom and all damages.

There is also a mandatory settlement conference scheduled within the next month. Discovery of surveillance evidence will be an...