Memorandum Opinion – Pattern and Practice Depo Topics for Catholic Church: these depositions are for discovery purposes, the scope of discovery is much broader than the admissibility of evidence; a part is entitled to seek any info that might lead to admissible evidence; these particular depositions are for a limited purpose, however – to determine liability for the claims of sexual abuse by minors by Archdiocesan priests or other priests in the ministry of the Archdiocese of Portland; not for the purpose of gathering evidence for possible punitive damages for these claims, or for the purpose of gathering info unrelated to these claims that might be useful in later claims against other church entities; tort claimants have only a limited amount of time in which to question these pattern and practices witnesses; tort claimants should focus on the questions that would be most likely to lead to admissible evidence on the liability of the Archdiocese of Portland for their claims; witnesses should provide answers to those questions, so long as the questions are limited as per this ruling Oregon View
Massage Envy Analysis (Missouri law) – 2020 summary; potential lawsuit: negligence per se based on respondeat superior, assault and battery based on respondeat superior, negligent supervision, negligent misrepresentation, premises liability Missouri View
Giacchetto v. Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District: Teacher, who claimed to have been diagnosed with adult Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), brought against school district alleging that the district had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL) by discriminating against her on the basis of her ADHD, retaliating against her for a complaint she filed with the New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR), and failing to accommodate her ADHD. District moved to compel teacher to provide authorizations for the release of all records from teacher’s social networking accounts. Court held that (1) all posting teacher made on social networking sites were not relevant to issue of emotional damages; (2) postings on social media that referenced events alleged in teacher’s complaint were relevant and discoverable; and (3) teacher’s attorney would be required to review social media posting for relevance. New York View
