Professional Documents
Culture Documents
VICTOR ZABORSKY,
and
DYLAN WARD,
Defendants
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO THE METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT’S
MOTION TO QUASH FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF ASSERTING THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT PRIVILEGE DURING FORMER DETECTIVE BRYAN WAID’S
DEPOSITION AS TO SUBJECT MATTER NOT PREVIOUSLY DIVULGED BY
DETECTIVE WAID AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
Defendant Joseph Price, joined by Defendants Victor Zaborsky and Dylan Ward, by their
respective undersigned counsel, respectfully file this Opposition to the Metropolitan Police
Department’s (“MPD”) Motion to Quash Deposition of Former Detective Bryan Waid, and in
1. Initially, the MPD has failed to properly assert the law enforcement privilege as
expressly required by governing precedent. Jurisprudence is plain that the MPD’s assertion of
the privilege is procedurally insufficient, and its Motion should be denied for that reason alone.
2. Rather, at a minimum, the MPD is required top set forth a verified statement that an
official with appropriate authority has reviewed the information sought and confirmed that the
privilege properly applies to specified information for specified reasons. This information is
lacking from the motion and is essential to a proper weighing of the interests involved in the
privilege. Indeed, a large volume of evidence regarding the MPD’s investigation was disclosed
to Defendant Price, as well as to Defendants Zaborsky and Ward, during the prior criminal
prosecution, and it is unclear as to whether and how the MPD could retain privilege over certain
3. Defendant does not question the existence of a law enforcement privilege, but the
facts and circumstances of this particular case, including that there has already been a criminal
proceeding against the same Defendants, seemingly negates the need for any wide-ranging
exercise or application of that privilege. Although the privilege may apply to some areas of
inquiry in the present matter, the MPD’s Motion lacks the clarity and specificity to enable
Defendant Price to ascertain whether the MPD is attempting to protect a legitimate public
interest or to merely stymie Defendant’s attempts to conduct discovery of its officers. On its
face, however, the Motion appears to request that this Court to provide the MPD relief that is far
beyond what is needed to protect the public interests intended to be protected by the law
enforcement privilege.
allegations contained in the MPD Affidavit in support of an arrest warrant for Dylan Ward
signed by Detective Waid on October 27, 2008. Given the symmetry of the allegations between
the prior criminal case and the present civil case and the vagueness of the MPD’s identification
of the information and/or areas of testimony for which the privilege is being asserted, Defendant
is unable to fathom that there is any significant information relating to the MPD investigation
that has not already been disclosed, or was required to have been disclosed, during the criminal
proceedings.
2
5. Ultimately, the Defendants face civil claims levied by Plaintiff, including a claim for
wrongful death, and damages in the amount of $20 million dollars. MPD detectives are expected
to be called as witnesses by both the Plaintiff and Defendants. Defendants have a strong interest
in conducting discovery into what information these witnesses will present when called at trial,
and if discovery cannot be had into information known to these witnesses, the best course of
6. The depositions of other MPD officers have been or will be noted. The substance of
the MPD’s Motion, as well as the substance of this Opposition, is applicable not only to the
deposition of former Detective Waid, but to all MPD personnel who may be called as witness or
Memorandum of Points and Authorities, which is adopted and incorporated as if fully set forth
herein.
8. The issues presented by the MPD’s Motion impacts not just Mr. Price, but all Parties
in the civil case. In light of their own respective interests in the issues presented by this Motion,
Defendants Zaborsky and Ward, through their undersigned respective counsel, join in Defendant
Price’s Opposition.
Dylan Ward, respectfully request that this Honorable Court deny the MPD’s Motion to Quash
with respect to former Detective Bryan Waid and to other MPD officers who have been or may
be noted for deposition, and for such further and additional relief as is deemed appropriate.
3
Respectfully submitted,
1
Admitted pro hac vice pursuant to Court’s 10/18/10 Order.
4
/s/ Larissa N. Byers
LARISSA N. BYERS (DC Bar # 472431)
2
Admitted pro hac vice pursuant to Court’s 2/26/10 Order.
3
Admitted pro hac vice pursuant to Court’s 8/2/10 Order.
5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 14th day of April, 2011, copies of the foregoing
Opposition, Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support thereof, and proposed Order were
William B. Jaffee
D.C. Bar No. 502399
Chief, General Litigation Section III
Patricia B. Donkor (patricia.donkor@dc.gov), admitted pro hac vice
Assistant Attorney General
441 Fourth Street, N.W., 6th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20001
Counsel for Non-Party Metropolitan Police Department