New York Law Journal
  • Home
  • News
  • Decisions
  • Columns
  • Practice Areas
  • My NYLJ
  • Careers
  • Courts
  • Verdicts
  • Public Notices
  • Smart Litigator

Home > Court Quashes City Subpoena for Documentary Outtakes

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Previous

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Next

Court Quashes City Subpoena for Documentary Outtakes

February 20, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

Lawyers for Florentine Films, John Siegal and Peter Shapiro of Baker & Hostetler, moved to quash what they called a "sweeping" subpoena, and, in November, filed a memorandum that said the five had not even been deposed for the pending litigation and the city was embarking on a fishing expedition (NYLJ, Nov. 9, 2012).

They invoked the federal reporters' common law privilege and New York's Shield Law, N.Y. Civil Rights Law §79-(h).

The city countered by saying the privileges couldn't be invoked because the film was not an exercise in journalism, but instead an advocacy piece in which the filmmakers sided with the plaintiffs.

In the city's papers, Assistant Corporation Counsel Philip DePaul and Senior Counsel Elizabeth Daitz said any claim to objectivity in "The Central Park Five" was undercut by the fact that Sarah Burns had worked with one of the plaintiffs' lawyer, Jonathan Moore, as an intern, and that Ken Burns had made public statements urging the city to settle with the plaintiffs.

But yesterday, Ellis said Florentine Films had "met its burden of demonstrating journalistic independence in the undertaking of the Film." He also said independence is not sacrificed because a reporter takes a position.

"An otherwise independent newsgathering process is not undermined solely because a publication reflects the journalist's previously held point of view," he said. "A journalist seeking to invoke the privilege must also demonstrate that her intention at the time the information is gathered was for the purpose of disseminating the information to the public, not for different reasons."

Here, he said, Sarah Burns stated that the film was not solicited by the plaintiffs or their attorneys, that it was actually made over the objection of one plaintiff's attorney, and that Florentine retained full editorial control.

And any statement made after the gathering of information, Ellis said, is "irrelevant for purposes of the reporter's privilege."

Ellis went on to say that the city had failed to show that the information it was seeking "is of likely relevance to a significant issue in the case and not reasonably available from another source."

Ellis distinguished this case from Chevron v. Berlinger, 629 F.3d 297 (2011), where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said filmmaker Joseph Berlinger had to turn over outtakes from his own film about environmental litigation in Ecuador because the film had been solicited by plaintiffs attorney Steven Donziger and Donziger exercised some editorial control over the final product.

Continue reading

Previous

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Next



Subscribe to New York Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Baker & Hostetler

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Second Circuit
  • Florentine Films
  • U.S. Court of Appeals

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Departure of President Leaves Dean in Charge at Brooklyn Law
    •      
  2. NYLJ 100
    •      
  3. Budget Plan Contains Funds to Reassign 26,000 18-B Cases
    •      
  4. 2013 Rising Stars
    •      
  5. NYLJ 100: Regional Firm Growth Outpaces Larger Firms in 2012
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

SEC Issues Whistleblower Award; More on the Horizon

Fixing Outside Counsel Budget Forecasting With Data

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

iPad Competition Heats Up

Discovery on Discovery Demands Cost-Shifting

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of HUD Forms Draws Supreme Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Restaurant in Union Square Park Ruled Permissible
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Magistrate Judge Finds Few Benefits to Class in Settlement
  •      
    • Subscription Required

3rd Circuit Could See Rise in Pay-for-Delay Litigation

Cozen Debt Forgiveness Is Campaign Contribution, Court Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Texas DA Faces Removal Suits Over DWI, Alleged Misconduct
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Upholds Disqualification of Bickel & Brewer
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fighting Over The Fifth
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Atlanta School Defendants Rely On New Jersey Officers' Case
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About NYLJ   |
  • Contact NYLJ   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media