Free Order - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 23.8 kB
Pages: 2
Date: March 16, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 324 Words, 2,105 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/15775/72.pdf

Download Order - District Court of Connecticut ( 23.8 kB)


Preview Order - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:01-cv-02166-JCH

Document 72

Filed 03/16/2004

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT : : : : : : : :

DUANE ZIEMBA V. JOHN ARMSTRONG, ET AL

CIV. NO. 3:01CV2166 (JCH)

PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING MARCH 4 & 5, 1999 VIDEOTAPE(S) Duane Ziemba, an inmate at Northern Correctional Institution, seeks production of a copy of Department of Correction videotape(s) pertaining to various incidents alleged in his complaint. Specifically, five videotapes of discrete

incidents from March 4 and 5, 1999, have been consolidated onto one VHS tape ("the tape"). The defendants provided plaintiff an

opportunity to view the tape. During a conference with the Court, defendants objected to producing a copy of the tape to plaintiff as he is an inmate at a maximum security facility and prohibited from possessing the tape. Plaintiff requested that the tape be sent to his mother, Pamela Ziemba of Middletown, Connecticut, for the purpose of showing the tape to prospective counsel. The defendants do not However, they is

object to providing the tape to Pamela Ziemba.

assert an objection based on concerns relating to institutional

Case 3:01-cv-02166-JCH

Document 72

Filed 03/16/2004

Page 2 of 2

security, as well as personal privacy issues. Defendants seek a protective order prohibiting copying of the video and its further distribution. WHEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that the tape be provided forthwith to Pamela Ziemba of Middletown, Connecticut along with a copy of this protective order. Pamela Ziemba and any other

individual who subsequently comes to possess said tape, including but not limited to the plaintiff's family members, or prospective attorneys, are expressly prohibited from copying said tape without prior written approval of the Court. A copy of this order will remain with the tape. Violations of the order may subject the offender to sanctions, including but not limited to prosecution for contempt of court.

SO ORDERED at Bridgeport this 15th day of March 2004.

_/s/______________________ HOLLY B. FITZSIMMONS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2