Plaintiffs’ submit that the Stay should be lifted, at least in part. This case
was stayed for six months sua sponte by the Court on November 19, 2018, ECF
#66. The Court explained, ECF #66 pg 1 of 11 and pg 2 of 11,
“…that forging ahead with this civil case at this time may inappropriately impede several interrelated and intertwined ongoing criminal investigations and prosecutions. See id. at 12 n. 10. And added to these two concerns, it now also appears that these civil proceedings threaten to devolve into a distracting spectacle, especially if this civil case proceeds contemporaneously with the aforementioned state investigations and prosecutions. The simple solution of temporarily staying these civil proceedings, under the Court’s discretionary authority to manage its docket and the progress of pretrial proceedings, is the best course at this juncture. Simply put, this Court was made aware that this action is strongly connected to
some criminal prosecutions and investigations and, relying on Salvaggio’s
testimony, ruled it necessary to Stay the case so that law enforcement could
prosecute and investigate without dealing with full-blown discovery of the instant
2
action. However, it has seemingly become more clear that the pending
prosecutions and investigations are either minor misdemeanors (such as blocking a
doorway, captured entirely on several camera angles), rather legally farfetched (as
will be explained herein in greater detail), or are simply being dismissed. To break
this down into digestible pieces, the criminal charges/investigations can be broken
down into several categories:
was stayed for six months sua sponte by the Court on November 19, 2018, ECF
#66. The Court explained, ECF #66 pg 1 of 11 and pg 2 of 11,
“…that forging ahead with this civil case at this time may inappropriately impede several interrelated and intertwined ongoing criminal investigations and prosecutions. See id. at 12 n. 10. And added to these two concerns, it now also appears that these civil proceedings threaten to devolve into a distracting spectacle, especially if this civil case proceeds contemporaneously with the aforementioned state investigations and prosecutions. The simple solution of temporarily staying these civil proceedings, under the Court’s discretionary authority to manage its docket and the progress of pretrial proceedings, is the best course at this juncture. Simply put, this Court was made aware that this action is strongly connected to
some criminal prosecutions and investigations and, relying on Salvaggio’s
testimony, ruled it necessary to Stay the case so that law enforcement could
prosecute and investigate without dealing with full-blown discovery of the instant
2
action. However, it has seemingly become more clear that the pending
prosecutions and investigations are either minor misdemeanors (such as blocking a
doorway, captured entirely on several camera angles), rather legally farfetched (as
will be explained herein in greater detail), or are simply being dismissed. To break
this down into digestible pieces, the criminal charges/investigations can be broken
down into several categories:
