Sie sind auf Seite 1von 56

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206 Filed 07/30/15 Page 1 of 5

1
2
3
4

5
6

Karen Clark, Bar No. 012665


Ralph Adams, Bar No. 015599
ADAMS & CLARK, PC
520 East Portland Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Tel: (602) 258-3542
karen@adamsclark.com
Attorneys for Timothy J. Casey
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

to

MANUEL de JESUS ORTEGA


MELENDRES, et aI.,

Plaintiff( s)

11
12
13
14

v.
JOSEPH M. ARPAIO, et al., .

Defendant(s).

Case No.: CV-07-2513-PHX-GMS


NON-PARTY TIMOTHY J.
CASEY'S OBJECTION TO
DEFENDANT ARPAIOAND
MARICOPA COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE STATEMENT RE
PROPOSED DEADLINE FOR
DOCUMENT PRODUCTION

15
16
17

Non-party Timothy J. Casey, by and through his undersigned specially appearing ethics

18

counsel, objects to Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio and MCSO's Statement re Proposed Deadline

19

for Document Production (Dkt#1203) at ~ 10.


20
21

Casey objects to this provision because it improperly imposes on him the expense and

22

burden of litigating his former clients' assertion of privilege over documents Casey has in his

23

possession and that are responsive to the subpoenas duces tecum issued to him by Plaintiffs.

24

On or about December 5, 2014, Casey turned over his entire Melendres client file to

25

Iafrate & Associates, successor counsel to his former clients, defendants Arpaio and MCSO.
26

The documents currently in his possession are merely copies of the documents that were turned

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206 Filed 07/30/15 Page 2 of 5

over to defendants' current counsel. Casey's former clients have asserted privileges as to

2 certain documents subject to Plaintiffs' request.


3
4

His former clients are the holders of the

privileges and they must litigate the resolution of any privilege disputes with Plaintiffs
preferably before any deposition of Casey takes place.

5
6

Earlier this year, in anticipation of a deposition of Casey, Plaintiffs issued their first

subpoena duces tecum ("SDT 1") to Casey. SDT 1 sought any documents that Casey may

have relating to the subject areas of: (1) the 12/23111 Preliminary Injunction issue; (2) the

5/14114 Court order issue; and (3) the Grissom matter. On May 21, 2015, Casey produced to

10

the parties a list of the "universe" of documents that he has been able to locate at his firm (and,
]1
12

again, which are duplicates of what is contained in the Melendres case file in the possession 0

13

Iafrate & associates), with a cover letter from undersigned counsel setting forth Casey's ethical

14

obligation not to produce any privileged, or arguably privileged, documents absent written

15

consent from his former clients, the holders of the privilege. See Exhibit 1.

16

On May 21, 2015, Casey also wrote Iafrate & Associates regarding the same documents.
17

18

See Exhibit 2.

19

On June 3, 2015, Iafrate & Associates responded to Casey's May 21, 2015

20

correspondence setting forth defendants' position on each document listed by Casey and

21

asserting various priVileges. See Exhibit 3. The letter does not show a copy having been sent
22
23

to Plaintiffs' counsel advising them of defendants' assertion of various privileges on the copies

24 of documents Casey listed.

25

Id.

On May 27, 2015, in anticipation of a rescheduled deposition of Casey, Plaintiffs issued

26

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206 Filed 07/30/15 Page 3 of 5

their second subpoena duces tecum to him ("SDT 2"). This subpoena included a request for

2 "[a]ny documents relating to production of video or audio recordings during the pretrial

discovery period in this litigation." Casey objected to this request on the grounds of undue

burden but produced to the best of his ability a list of potentially responsive documents by

5
6

general description that he knows existed at the time he turned his entire Melendres file to
successor counsel, Iafrate & Associates. See Exhibit 4.

On June 16, 2015, Plaintiffs expressed concern regarding the adequacy of Casey's

search for documents in response to SDT 1 and SDT 2. See Exhibit 5. In response, on June

lO

18, 2015, Casey explained that he has identified all the documents he has in his possession and
II

12

that any dispute over privilege issues pertaining to the copies of documents he has in his

l3

possession is for Plaintiffs and defense counsel to resolve. See Exhibit 6.

14
15

On June 19, 2015, Plaintiff responded to Casey objections and representations stating
that "based on his representations in Karen's letter of June 18, we will not take further action

16
17

but will reserve the issue for a later time." See Exhibit 7. On June 22, 2015, Casey advised

18

Plaintiff that he would agree to do a pinpoint search of discovery related documents i

19

Plaintiffs advised of the date and author of any specific document that they believe must be or

20

should be on his electronic system. See exhibit 8. No response to the letter was received.

21

Based on the foregoing, Casey has conducted multiple comprehensive, exhaustive, and
22
23

personally expensive searches for documents responsive and potentially responsive to

24

Plaintiffs' SDT 1 and SDT2. He has provided to the parties detailed lists as set forth above and

25 as contained in the Exhibits 1 and 4 to this Objection. His former clients are the holders of the
26

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206 Filed 07/30/15 Page 4 of 5

privileges, and they have asserted privileges as to the responsive or potentially responsive

documents Casey has listed. The litigation and resolution of these privilege issues, therefore,

properly belongs to defendants and Plaintiffs. Casey should not bear the personal expense and

the professional burden of litigating his former clients' assertion of privilege. Additionally,

5
6

Casey should not face the Hobson's Choice of either complying with SDT 1 and SDT 2 by

producing documents that his former clients assert are privileged or violating his ethical duties

8 to his former clients to maintain the attorney-client privilege and client confidences.
9

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 30th day of July, 2015

10

11

ADAMS & CLARK, P.C.

12

13
14

/s/ Karen Clark


Karen Clark
Attorney for Timothy J. Casey

15
16
17

18
19

20
21

22
23

24
25
26

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206 Filed 07/30/15 Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2

I hereby certify that 'on this 30th day of July, 2015, I caused the foregoing
document to be filed electronically with the Clerk of Court through the CMlECF

System for filing; and served on counsel of record via the Court's CMIECF System.

By: /s/ Beverley Thomas

10

11

12

13

14

15
16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
26

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 1 of 51

EXHIBIT 1

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 2 of 51

ADA~S & CLARK"

PC

May 21. 2015


SENT VIA ELECTRONIC AND REGULAR MAIL TO:
Stanley Young, Esq.
COVINGTON & BURLING, LLP
333 Twin DoJphinRoad
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Michelle M. Iaftate, Esq.
IAFRATE & ASSOCIATES
649 North Second Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85003

Re:

Melendres, et al v. Joseph M. Arpaio. et al.; Case No.: CV07"()25130-PHX

Dear Mr. Young and Ms. Iafrate:

As you are aware. Mr. Casey is under a Subpoena Duces Tecum to produce various
documents, before his deposition takes place. These docwnents relate to the
following subject areas:

1.
2.
3.

The 12!23/t t Preliminary Injunction issue;


The 05/14/14 issue, and;
The Grissom matter.

I have previously disclosed to you that Mr. Casey advises hisenti:re Ortega
Melendres file, including emails.isin the exclusive possessioo and control of Ms.
Iafrate. Plaintiffs, therefore, haVe been directed to secure any and aI1documents '
responsive to the subpoena directly from Ms. Iafrate.
I have not yet been provided any documents, or been made aware that Ms. Iafrate
has produced any doewnents, ftom the Ortega-Melendres file (that Mr. Casey
provided to her last year) in response to the Plaintiffs' subpoena to Mr. Casey. On
the other hand, Mr. Casey has already condueted a reasonable and diligent search of
his fum's electronic systems and has identified documents that his :tirJ:D has that
appear responsive to the subpoena as to thethree-above stated subject areas. Those
documents are listed in the attached document log and contain the "universe" of the
responsive docwnents Mr. Casey has in his finn.
In abundance of caution, and in strict compliance with his etl:UcaI duties to his
fonner clients. Mr. Casey will not pIOduce to Plaintiffs the documents set forth in

Ad.... " CIarIc, PC


Attorneys at Law
520 East Portland Street
Phoenix, Arizona 850044843

80218N142
602 258-1377 FAX

"""........"'com

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 3 of 51


MtlJI11,1015
Pagel

ADAMS & CLARK,

the attached document log regarding the 12123/11 preliminary injunction issue or the
Grissom matter until and unless Ms. Iafrate, on behalfof her clients and Mr. Casey's
fonner clients approves in writing that such documents may be produced to
Plaintiffs in response to the subpoena. I will immediately provide the Casey
documents directly to Ms. Iafrate for prompt review and decision.

As for the Casey documents that he believes are related to the May 14,2014, those
documents must be approved in writing for releaselproduction to .Plaintiff by Ms.
Iafmte or otherwise included in a privilege log pursuant to the tenns of the Court's
Order dated May 14,2015 (Dtt. #1094) at p. 9:2-7.

[ therefore ask that you each timely work on the document production issue and let
me know the outcome.
Sincerely.

ADAMS & CLARK, PC

~ctJKaren Clark

KC:bt
Client
Enel:

00:

PC

Adame .. Ct.rIc, PC
Attorney. at Law
520 Eaet Portland Street
Phoenix, Arizona 850041843

602 268-8142
602 258-1377 FAX

..... .'""*rk.oom

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 4 of 51

MELENDRES V. ARPAIO,et aL, No. CV 07..o25J3-PHX~MS


TIMOTHY J. CASEY/SCHMITT SCHNECK SMYTH CASEY & EVEN, P.C.'S DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE

TO PLAINTIFFS' SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AND TIlE COURT'S ORDER, INCLUDING BUT NOT

LIMITED TO; ITS MAY 14, 201S ORDER

~~.~G.:A,Rl)ING 12123/11 ~-!\J-Y.~CTJON~ - , ' ..'


. . ... ,.; ....... '...~:. '.' ........ ..... ;
. '~ :.. :.~~) '7 .:':: .:~,.~:,:.. '"., ....';.... .", ':>,: .. ' ::.".:-,:.~\': ~::..
A1JTBo.R .: I R,ECJPJElIff(S) In. ;COpy TO .' ., -.;" .;(::~"';:;';:l)~oN . -'.'.
'fB~"""""QWhb ;
,.DATE
12123/11 Tim Casey I Brian Sands'
T()mLiddy
E=m,-Bille: ~eiendresOrder on Swnmary
CaseySub
John MacIntyre
Jerry Sheridan
Joseph Sousa

01111112 I Joseph Sousa

I Brett Palmer

Eileen Hemy
James Williams

'l

Judgment With Order attached

E-mail re: ~ out tr~,g reference the


comt order With Order attached

TimCase}'
Rollie Seebert
Brian Sands

000001-2

CaseySub
00003-43

David Trombi
Eileen Henry
Joseph Sousa

01/19/12

I Brett Palmer' I MCSO personnel

. E-mail re: My cell number

Tim Casey
Randy Paulsen

CaseySub
000044

Vicki K.ratovi4
Esq(MCAO)

I01119/12 IBrett Palmer IJoseph Sousa IT,Michael


C8sey~,
-mail, re:
reference" the
~ySub
court order and forwarded to Tim Casey re :
000045-49
int,

Trowbridge

Puttin
g,'

out,

t r a i
'
n
,i
.
n g "

Scenarios for review based onjudge's order

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 5 of 51

11106/14 I Tim Casey

Steve Fax

Tom

Christine Stutz
James Williams

ElleenHemy
Jerry Sheridan
Steve Bailey

E-mail re: Melendres Order on Summary


Judgment with Order attached and forwarded
12fl3/11 e-nuril from Tim Casey re: Melendres
Order on Summary Judgment

000050-53

John

12/31/11

05115/14 I Christine
Stutz

Tim Casey
Tom Liddy

05/16114 I Tom Liddy

Tim Casey

05/20114 I Tom Liddy

Tim Casey

Eileen Henry
James Williams

Schmitt Schneck Smyth Casey &. Even, P.C.

CaseySub

REDACTED InvoicelStatement No. 120030


dated 1213112011. Tim Casey time entries for
11 andl2130/11

000054-56

IE-mail

string between T. Casey and C. Stutz re:


Jerry Sheridan's 05/14114 Letter to Monitor
Warshaw
E-mail re: CV-07-02.513 Melendres, et aI. v.
AIpaio, et aI. with forwarded e-mail dated
05/15/14 from Tim Casey to Jerry Sheridan,
to T. Liddv and C. Stutz I'n'l":'n .. ""'T'Tl
E-mml string re: Melendres v. Arpaio; Chief
Sheridan Letter to Monitor Warshaw

I
I

CaseySub
000070-71

CaseySub
000072-74

CaseySub
000075-77

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 6 of 51

05131114

Schmitt Schneck Smyth Casey &. Even, P.C.


REDACTED InvoicelStatement No. 136636
dated 05/31/14 with Tim Casey time entries

CaseySub

000078-79

05/14/14 an,d 05115114

Tim Casey

Tim Casey handwritten note re "May 2014 TJC


. with MCSO
Memory" re 05114/15
"

,,

ooCUMENTs REGARDINGGRISSO~l\:fA1TER
'
,

, DAT,E

, 'Al]THOR

Karen Morris

Grissom
08127/13 Michele

'

.',

"

RECIPIENT(s)

,'-;OPYTO "

CaseySub

000080

'

"

, :~ntsCRlPTlON

" lJAlES N,OS.


CaseySub

Joseph Arpaio

Screen print of Facebook message

Tim Casey

E-mail re: Contact information for Karen Morris


Grissom with Facebook message attached

000081
CaseySub
000082-83

E-mail re: Contact information - UPDATE re T.


Casey locating Karen Manis Grissom

CaseySub
000084-86

E-mail re: attached transcripts re interviews of


Scott Grissom, Karen Grissom and Dale

000087-107

Vendredi
(Executive

Assistantto
Jerry
Sheridan)
08128113 Tim Casey

Jerry Sheridan

11106/13 Don Vogel

Michele
Vendredi
Tim Casey

Tim Casey
EileenHemy

CaseySub

Grissom

11/06/13 Tim Casey

Amy Lake
(Executive

Assistant to
Joseph Arpaio)
Jerry Sheridan
John MacIntyre

Eileen Henry
Tom Liddy
James Williams

E-mail string re: Melendres Vogel Transcripts

CaseySub
000108

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 7 of 51

10123113

Tim Casey

11/06/13 Tim Casey

Don Vogel

Letter retaining Vogel Investigatio~ LLC re

Joseph Arpaio

interviewing Karen and Dale Grissom


Letter re Grissom matter

Jerry Sheridan
Jack Macintyre
Tom Liddy

10/31113

Schmitt Schneck Smyth Casey & Even, P.C.

11130/13

dated 10/31113 with Tim Casey time entries


dated 10117113.10122113. 10123113,10126/13,
10128113,10129/13,10130113 and 10131113 and
James Williams"time entries dated 10129/13 and
10131113
Schmitt Schneck Smyth Casey & Even, P.C.

REDACTED InvoicelStatement No. 133117

CaseySub
000109-110
CaseySub
000111-124
CaseySub
000125-131

CaseySub
REDACTED Invoice Statement No. 133719
000132-134
dated 1113011 3with Tim Casey time entries dated
11105113, 11106/13, 11107/13; and 11108/13.

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 8 of 51

EXHIBIT 2

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 9 of 51

ADAMS &. CLARK,

PC

May212015

HAND DELIVEREDTO:
Michelle M. Iafrate, Esq.
IAFRATE & ASSOCIATES
649 North Second Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85003

I.e:

Melendres, etalv.losephM.Arpalo, etaL; Case No.: CV-07"()2S13()..


PHX~GMS

Dear Ms. Iafrate:


Please find enclosed for your immediate review the "universe" of documents
that Mr. Casey has been able to locate at his firm (which are dupJicates of what
is in your case file) that appear responsive to Plaintiffs' Subpoena Duces Tecum
issued to him regarding the following subject areas:
1.
2.

3.

The 12t23/11 preliminary injunction issue;


The May 14, 2014 issue; and
The Grissom matter.

In strict compliance with his ethicaJ duties to his former clients, Mr. Casey win
not produce to Plaintiffs the attached documents until and unless you, on behalf
of your clients (Mr. Casey's former clients), approve in writing that such
documents may be produced to Plaintiffs in response to the subpoena. 1ask that
you provide your written approval, or position, to me no later than the close of
business on Friday, May 29, 2015. If I do not hear from you by this date, ( will
need to seek Court assistance given that my client is under a subpoena.
Sincerely,

i7S&C~

,,~
KC:bt
cc: Oient

Adam CI.... PC
Attorneys alLaw
520 East Pol1land snit
Phoenix, Arizona860()4..1843
102 ......2
602 258-1377 FAX
www.~

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 10 of 51

EXHIBIT 3

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 11 of 51

IAFRATE & ASSOCIATES


Attorneys at Law
Michele Iafrate

649 N. 2nd Ave.


PlIeftdx, AZ 85003
(602) 2349773
Fall (602) 2S4.W33
Tax 10 26-1808233

June 3,2015
Via E"mail and U.S. Mail
Karen Clark
Adams & Clark
520 E. Portland, Ste. 200
Phoenix, Arizona 85004

RE: Arpaio, et a/. adv. Melendres, et a/.


U.S. District Court Case No: CV07-02513 PHX-GMS
M

Dear Ms. Clark:


This letter responds to your May 21, 2015 correspondence. I reviewed the
documents you provided relating to the December 23, 2011 preliminary
tnjunction, the May 14, 2014 traffic stop recordings, and the Grissom matter.
Pursuant to your request, please find attached your table with a column added
that contains Defendants' objections/comments to each item.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact
our office.

Sincerely,
IAFRATE & ASSOCIATES

~f?J~

. MMI:CS/jdl
Enclosure
cc: John Masterson

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 12 of 51

MELENDRES V. ARPAIO, et aI., No. CV 07-025I3-PHX-GMS


TIMOTHY J. CASEY/SCHMITT SCHNECK SMYTII CASEY & EVEN, P.C. '8 DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE

TO PLAINTIFFS' SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AND THE COURT'S ORDER, INCLUDlNG BUT NOT LIMITED

TO, ITS MAY 14,2015 ORDER

)~~,

i>~1j:~ +" :7:~~:'


12123/11

Tim Casey

Brian Sands
John MacIntyre Jerry
Sheridan
Joseph Sousa

Tom Liddy
Eileen henry
James

Tim Casey
Rollie
Seebert
Brian Sands
David
Trombi
Eileen
Henry
Joseph
Sousa

01/11/12

Joseph Sousa

BrettPa1mer

01119/12

Brett Palmer

MCSO personnel
Tim Casey Randy
Paulsen

Vicki Kratovil
01119112

Brett Palmer

Joseph Sousa

Williams

E--mail re:
Casey Sub
Melendres Order 000001-2
on Summary
Judgment with
Order attached
E-mail re: Putting CaseySub
out training
00003-43
reference the
court order with
Order attached

E-mail re: My
cell number

CaseySub
000044

.~'.

.-"::

. . -: I

Court already deemed no


attomey-client privilege
applies.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 38-1109,


Defendants assert that the
officer's telephone number
must be redacted.

Tim Casey E--mail re: Puthn,',g CaseySub


Michael .
out training_ '---'-0-'-OO'-'0_4_5----'-_ _ _--L-_~"______'_~,

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 13 of 51

Karen Clark
May 28, 2015
Page 2 of3

11106114

Steve Fax

Tim Casey

12/31/11

---

------

Trowbridge

reference the
comt order and
forwarded to
Time Casey re:
Scenarios for
review based on
judge's order

49

applies.

Tom Liddy
Christine
Stutz
James
Williams
Eileen

E-mailre:

CaseySub

Comt already deemed no


attorney-client privilege
applies.

Melendres Order 000050


53
on Summary
Judgment with
Order attached
and forwarded
12123/11 e-mail
Henry
from Tim Casey
Jerry
re: Melendres
Sheridan
Steve Bailey
Order on
-Summary
John
Judgment
MacIntyre
Schmitt schneck CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure
based on attorney-client and
000054
Smyth Casey &
work product privileges.
Even, P.C.
56
REDACTED
Lnvoicet.StateDnent
No. 120030 dated
1213112011. Tim
Caseyfune
entries for
12126/11.
-----

---

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 14 of 51

Karen Clark
May 28, 2015
Page2of4
----------

12128/11 and
12130/11
DOCUMENTS REGARDING 05/14/14 COURT ORDER

DATE

AUTHOR

RECIPIENT(S)

05/15/14

Jerry Sheridan

Tim Casey
Tom Liddy
Christine Stutz

05/15114

Christine Stutz

Tim Casey
Tom Liddy

05/16114

Tom Liddy

Tim Casey

COPY TO

Eileen
Henry
James
Williams

_____ L

I&A COMMENTS
BATES
NOS.
E-mail re: Letter CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure
with forwarded e- 000057
of e-mail based on work
mail from Jerry
product doctrine. The
69
Sheridan to
Warshaw letter has been
Monitor
disclosed. Defendants
Warshaw with
previously objected to
attached 05/14/14
disclosure ofthe video
letter to Monitor
recording e-mails (000060
Warshaw and e000069), but Court deemed no
mails re video
privilege applied.
recording d~!!~
E-mail string
CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure
between T. Casey 000070
of both e-mails contained on
and C. Stutz re:
71
page 000070-71 based on work
Jerry Sheridan's
product doctrine.
05/14114 Letter to
The May 15.20149:51 AM
Monitor
and May 14,201411:25 PM
Warshaw
emails are not privileged.
E-mail re: CV07 CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure
02513 Melendres, 000072
ofthe May 16,20148:21 AM
et a1. v. AIpaio, et
74
e-mail based on work product
aI., with
doctrine. Defendants object to
forwarded e-mail
disclosure ofthe May 15,2014
DESCRIPTION

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 15 of 51

Karen Clark
May2S,20IS

Page 2 of'

dated 05/15/14
from T. Liddy
and C. Studtz
(REDACTED)

4:48 PM e-mail on page


000072-73 based on attorneyclient privilege.
The May 15,2014 3:21 PM email on page 000073 is not
P!i~eged.

OS/20/14

Tom Liddy

Tim Casey

05/31/14

n/a

n/a

Tim Casey

n/a

E-mail string re: CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure


ofboth e-mails CQIltained on
000075
Melendres v.
page 000075 based on work
77
Arpaio; Chief
product doctrine. Defendants
Sheridan Letter to
object to disclosure oithe e..
Monitor
mail at the top ofpage 000076
Warshaw
also based on the work pr~et
doctrine. The document on
page 000077 has already been
disclosed
----------
Schmitt Schneck CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure
ofthe billing entries on page
00007S
Smyth Casey &
000079 as they contain
79
Even, P.C.
attorney client protected
REDACTED
communication and work
Invoice/Statement
product.
No. 136636 dated
05/31/ 14 with
Tim Casey time
entries 05/14/14
and 05/15/14
As this note contains Tim
Tim Casey
CaseySub
Casey's
mental impressions,
000080
handwritten note
r~ ''May 2014
Defendants object tod!~!os~

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 16 of 51

KareDClark
May28,20JS
Page2of6

TJC Memory" re
05114/15 mtg
withMCSO
DOCUMENTS REGARDING GRISSOM MAITER

--------

DATE

AUTHOR

RECfPIENT(S)

Karen Morris

Joseph Arpaio

COPY TO

DESCRIPTION

BATES

I & A COMMENTS

Screen print of

NOS.
CaseySub
000081

No objection

Facebook

Grissom
08/27/13

Michele Vendredi
(Exec. Asst. to J.
Sheridan)

Tim Casey

08128/13

Tim Casey

Jerry Sheridan
Michele Vendredi

11106/13

DonVoge1

Tim Casey

Tim Casey
Eileen
Henry

based on work product


doctrine.

message
E-mail re:
Contact
information for
Karen Morris
Grissom with
Facebook
message attached
E-mail re:
Contact
information
UPDATE reT.
Casey locating
Karen Morris
Grissom
E-mail re:
attached
transcripts re
interviews of
Scott Grissom,

CaseySub
000082
83

Defend~

object to disclosure
of this attomey client
communication on page
000082.

Casey Sub Defendants object to disclosure


000084
of this attorney client
communication on pages
86
000084-86.

CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure


000087
of this e-mail on page 000087
107
and the transcripts to 000107 as
work product.

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 17 of 51

Karen Clade
May 28, 2015

Page2of7

11106/13

Tim Casey

Amy Lake (Exec. Asst


to Arpaio) Jerry
Sheridan
John MacIntyre

10/23/13

Tim Casey

Don Vogel

11106/13

Tim Casey

Joseph Arpaio

Eileen
Henry
Tom Liddy
James
Williams

Jerry
Sheridan

Karen Grissom
and Dale Grissom
E-mail string re CaseySub
Melendres Vogel
000108
Transcripts

Letter retaining
Vogel
Investigations,
LLCre
interviewing
Karen and Dale
Grissom
Letter re Grissom
matter

Jack
Macbityre

Court already deemed no


attomey-client privilege
applies.

CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure


000109
of this. letter on page 000109
110 as work product.
110

CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure


00011
ofthis attorney client
124
communication on page
000111-124.

Tom Liddy

10/31113

Schmitt Schneck CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure


Smyth Casey &
000125
of Tim Casey's billing entries
Even, P.C.
131
on pages 0000127-131 because
REDACTED
they contain attorney client
Invoice/Statement
communications and work
No. 133117 dated
product
10/31113 w/fim
Casey time
entries dated
10/17/13.~_

~---

...

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 18 of 51

Karen Clarlc
May 28. 2015

Page2of8

11130/13

10/22113,
10/23/13,
10/26/13, 10128
10/31/13

Schmitt Schneck
CaseySub Defendants object to disclosure
Smyth Casey &;
000132
of Tim Casey's billing entries
on pages 0000 132-134because
134
Even, P.C.
they contain attorney client
REDACTED
Invoice/Statement
communications and work
No. 133719 dated
product
11130/13 wlfim
Casey time
entries dated
11105/13
11108/13
~-

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 19 of 51

EXHIBIT 4

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 20 of 51

ADAMS & CLARK,

PC

June 9, 2015
SENT VIA ELECTRONIC AND REGULAR MAIL
Michelle M. Iafrate. Esq.
IAFRATE & ASSOCIATES
649 North Second Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Stanley Young. Esq.
COVINGTON & BURLING, LLP
333 Twin Dolphin Road
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Re:

Melendres, el al. v. Arpaio, el al.; Case No. CV-07-025130-PHX-GMS

Dear Ms. Iafrate and Mr. Young:


As counsel from Tim Casey. I am in receipt of Plaintiff's latest Subpoena Duces
Tecum directed to him, dated May 27. 2015. Attachment A to that subpoena at
paragraph number 2 asks Mr. Casey to search for the foHowing:
Any documents relating to production ofvideo or audio recordings
during the pretrial discovery period i,n tbis litigation.
Mr. Casey objects to this request on the grounds that it is unduly bUJlden.some and
expensive for him and his staff to search his law firm's electronic system for
documents that may potentially be responsive to this request. This is especially true
given that his entire fonner case, file that would contain aU potentially responsive
documents is within the exclusive possession and control of current counsel for his
former clients, Ms. Iafrate. If Plaintiffs seek potentially responsive documents on
this particular subject, then they should seek them directly from Ms. Iafrate and her
clients, not from a third party. Mr. casey.
With the foregoing said, Mr. Casey has prepared to the best of his ability the
attached list of potentially responsive documents by general description that he
knows existed at the time he turned over his entire Orlega..Melendres case file to
successor counsel. Ms. Iafrate, last fall. Whether the documents are. in fact.
responsive to paragraph number 2 is not for Mr. Casey to detennine. Whether his
list in fact constitutes the "universe of discovery-related communications" is
unknown.
In addition, please note that Mr. Casey believes the listed documents are protected
from disclosure by the attomey-client and/or work product privilege, and his former

Adams II Clark, PC
Attorneys at Law
520 East Portland Street
Phoenix, Arl!ona 850041843
602 258.3542
602 268-1377 FAX

www.adllmsc/ark.com

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 21 of 51


June 9,2015
Page 2

ADAMS & CLARK,

PC

clients are the holders of any applicable privileges.


Please advise if Mr. Casey is required to go to the expense offiling a Motion for
ProtectionIMotion to Quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum as to Attachment A.
paragraph 2. It is my hope that he will not need to incur such personal expense
when Plaintiffs can, and should, obtain the documents directly from current counsel
Ms. Iafrate and her clients, subject to a privilege determination.
I ask that you advise me of your .position on whether it is necessary to file the
foregoing Motion to Quash by June 16,2015.

Adams" Clark. PC
Attorneys at Law
520 East Portland Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85Q04-1843
602 268-3542
602 258-1377 FAX

www.adamscla.k.com

I further trust that Ms. Iafrate has conununicated to Plaintiffs' counsel, or will do so
soon, her clients' position and objections totne document list that Mr. Casey
provided to you via my letter dated May 21, 2015 on the other subjects of the first
Subpoena Duces Tecum served on him by Plaintiffs.
Sincerely.

2:&C~PC

Ka~
KC:bt

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 22 of 51

Melend.res v. Arpaio

Counsel correspondence to MCSO re diseovery

DOCUMENTS POTENTIALLY RESPONSIVE TO PLAINTIFFS' SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM DATED MAY 27,2015 AT

ATTACHMENT "A' AT,2

to
MCSOJack
MacIntyre
cc:Jean
Bowman (Risk
Mgt), Chris
Keller
.c..-l..WW

2.

08/05/0S I Eileen

PRESERVATION
REQUEST FROM
PLAlNTIFFS'
COUNSEL

Records Request

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Attomey-client privilege and attorney work product

Chris Keller
(MCAO)

Melendres v.
Arpaio re records
search and

cc: Bruce

protective order

White

issue

Henry

3.

4.

Tim Casey

08112108 I Tim Casey

I E-mail to

I E-mail to Dot
Culhane at
MCSOLegal
Liaison

Melendres re
records search

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

status

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 23 of 51

5.

I E-mail to Dot

08114/08 I Tim Casey

Culhane at
MCSOLegal

Melendres re
records search
status

E-mail to Chiefs . Melendres v.


Jack MacIntyre
MCSO Racial
and David
Profiling case
meeting with HSU
Hendershott
cc: Chris Keller members
(MCAO), Jean
Bowman

7.

I 08/21108 I Tim
Casey

8.

f 08121108

I Eileen
Henry

9.

08122108 I Eileen
Henry

IE-mail
to MCSO
Raymond Jones,
,

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v.
MCSO Alleged
Charles Siemens, Racial Profiling
Manny Madrid
Case re obtaining
cc: Dot Culhane records
(Legal Liaison),
Chief Jack
MacIntyri
I Melendres v.
E-mail to Tim
MCSO Alleged
Casey
Racial Profiling
Casere

E-mail to MCSO
Legal Liaisons
Department with
attached records

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 24 of 51

E-mail to MCSO

Casey

II.

I 09/10/08 I Chris
Keller

12.

I 10/10/08 I Tim
Casey

I Legal Liaison

Dot Culhane and


Chief Jack
Macintyre
cc: Chris Keller,
Jean Bowman
with attached
letter from
plaintiffs'
counsel dated
09110/08
E-mail to Tim
Casey
responding to email above

I Correspondence
to Chris Keller

Melendres v.
MCSO (Racial
Profiling Case)
Public Records
Request

Melend.res v.
MCSO (Racial
Profiling Case)
Public Records
It uest
Quarterly Status
Report re discovery

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 25 of 51

14.

I 11/10108 I Tim
Casey

15.

I 12/05/08 I Tim
Casey

Letter to MCSO
Legal Liaison
Dot Culhane wI
attached letter
from plaintiffs'
counsel dated
10/23/08
cc: ChiefJack
Macintyre;
Chris Keller
(MCAO
E-mail to MeSO
Legal Liaison
Dot Culhane
with attached
letter from
plaintiffs'
counsel dated
11104/08
Cc: ChiefJack
Macintyre, Paul
Chagolla, Chris
Keller (MCAO),
Trisha Rough

IMCSOLegal
Liaison Dot
Culhane, Jack
Chief Macintyre
with attached
letter from

Melendres v.
Arpaio (July 21,
2008 Public
Records Request)

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v.
Arpaio re public
records search

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v.
ArpaiolPublic
Records Request

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 26 of 51

plaintiffs counsel

dated 11/26/08

and proposed

letter to D.

Bodneyfor

17.

Culhane,
MCSO

Legal

Liaison

I 12110/08 Dot
Culhane,
MCSO

Legal

Liaison

18.

I 12110/08 I Dot

19.

Culhane,
MCSO
Legal

Liaison

I 12/10/08 I Tim
Casey

Fax to Tim
Responsive
documents

Casey
with attachments

i Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

E-mail to Tim
I CAD Reports
Casey

forwarding

MCSO's IT

person Scott

Jefferys'

12/09/08
e-mail
E-mail to Tim
CAD Reports
Casey
forwarding Scott

Jefferys'

12/09/08 e-mail
Melendres v.
E-mail to Scott
ArpaiolLitigation
Jefferys
cc: Dot Culhane, Discovery and
ChifJack
Public Records

, Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

IAttorney-client privilege and attorney work product


Attomey-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 27 of 51

20.

I 12/11108 I Dot

E-mail to Eileen
Henry

Scott Jeffries at
MCSOandCAD
document
production

to Scott
Jefferys
Cc:MCSO
Legal Liaison
Dot Culhane,
Chief Jack
lntyre
E-mail to MCSO
Legal Liaison
Dot Culhane
cc: Chief Jack

MelenOI'es v.
Arpaio/Litigation
Discovery and
Public Records
Request

Culhane,
MCSO
Legal
Liaison

22.

I 12119/08 t Tim
Casey

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v.
ArpaiolPublic
Records Request

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Response to
December 19,2008
Request for
Information ref:
Melendres v.

Attorney-client privilege

n e
23.

101105/09 I Pam
Woody,
MCSO
Legal
Liaison

Letter to Tim
Casey

to
Melendres v .
Jeannie Bowman Arpaio; FYI re
public records
(RM)with
request
attached
01106/09 letter to
plaintiffs'
counsel
..Q-.Iill1l1

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 28 of 51

25.

01107/09 Pam
Woody,
MCSO
Legal
Liaison

26.

01108/09 Tim
Casey

27.

02123/09 Pam
Woody,
MCSO
Legal
Liaison

enclosing
materials
Letter to Tim
Casey

E-mail to Chief
Jack Macintyre
andMCSO
Legal Liaison
Dot Culhane
cc:Scott
Jefferys,Jeanrne
Bowman (EM)
Letter to Tim
Casey

'--

Response to
October 24, 2008
Request for
Information ref:
Melendres v.
Arpaio
Melendres v.
Arpaio/Public
Records Request
and CAD MCSO
traffic stop
information from
CAD system
Response to
February 17, 2008
Request for
Information ref:
Melendres v.
Atpaio Officer
names, badge
numbers and
contact information

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Attomey-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 29 of 51

via e-mail and


regular mail

29.

02/26/09 I Tim Casey I Letter to


Jeannie
Bowman(RM)
Cc: Chief
David
Hendershott,
ChiefJack
MacIntyre.
MCSOLegal
Liaison Dot

30.

03/04/09 I Tim Casey I E-mail to HSU


Lt. Joe Sousa
cc: Charles
Siemens
03/16/09 I Tim Casey E-mail to Mike
Hall and
Tiffany Shaw,
MCSOLegal
Liaisons

31.

lVJ.lO'llO'llU1~~ v. Arpaio re
Plaintiffs' s Request for
the Production of
Documents and MCSO
search for and provide
documents
Melendres v. Arpaio re
assistance to provide
discovery responses on
behalf of defendant
Maricopa County

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Info requested from


MCSO's HSU re
search

Attomey-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v. Arpaio
(Alleged Racial
Profiling Case) re
assistance in searching
for and gathering
documents on list of

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 30 of 51

32.

03/16/09 I Lt. Joe

Sousa
33.

I 03117/09 I Tim Casey

34.

I 03117/09 I Lt. Joe


Sousa

35.

E-mail to Tim
Casey
cc: Perla Plata

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

E-mail to HSU
Brett Palmer
cc: Perla Plata

03/20/09 I Tim Casey J -E-mail to Lt.

Joe Sousa
cc: Chief Brian

36.

Melendres- providing
responsive HSU
materials

Sands
109 I Tim Casey I E-mail to Scott

Jefferys
cc: Chiefs Brian
Sands and
David

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melen<tres re saturation
patrol summaries and
other documents

I Attomey-client privilege and attorney work product

Me1endres v. Arpaio re Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product


2009 MCSO traffic
stops in the same
format (the data from
01/01109 to October 31,

attorney work product


After a thorough search of our records with the infonnation.

38.

E-mail to '-'1.U~~
David
Hendershott,

Melendres v. Arpaio
UPDATE AND
STATUS REPORT
Plaintiffs Intent to

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 31 of 51

39.

Brian Sands,
JackMacIn e
I 11/12/09 I Tim Casey E-mail to
Jeannie
Bowman(RM)

E-mail to Chiefs
David
Hendersho~

Brian Sands,
Jack MacIntyre

41.

[ 11112/09 I Tim Casey I E-mail to


Jeannie
Bowman(RM)

42. I 11112/09 I Tim Casey I E-mail to Chiefs


Brian Sands,
David

Seek Discovery
Sanctions
Melendres v. Arpaio
UPDATE AND
STAruS REPORTPlaintiffs Intent to
Seek Discovery
ons

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

MeIendres v. Arpaio I Attorney~lient privilege and attorney work product


UPDATERE
PLAINTIFFS'
REQUEST TO FILE A
SANCTION MOTION
and Comt oral order
during telephone
hearing for MCSO to
keep and preserve all
documents regarding
saturation patrols
and/or relevant to this
case.
Melendres v. Arpaio - I Attomey-client privilege and attorney work product
UPDATERE
PLAINTIFFS'
REQUEST TO FILE A
SANCTION MOTION
re E-mail above
as FYI.
Emails reference crime Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product
suppression patrols re

10

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 32 of 51

44.

E-mail to vll.1~J.i:)
David
Hendershott,
Brian Sands,
Jack MacIntyre,
Lt. Joe Sousa,
Sgt. Brett
Palmer, Sgt.
Manny Madrid,
Charles Siemens
11112109 I Tim Casey I E-mail to
Bowman(RM)

Melendres v. Arpaio et
aL (Alleged Racial
Profiling Lawsuit)
COURT WRITTEN
ORDER TO KEEP
DOCUMENTS RE
SATURATION
PATROLS

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v. Arpaio et
al. (Alleged Racial
Profiling Lawsuit)
COURT ORDER TO
KEEP DOCUMENTS
RE SATURATION
PATROLSre
Forwarding e-mail

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

v.
~o/Conrespondence

Hendershott,
Brian Sands,
Jack MacIntyre

from counsel re
Discovery
w/auached letter from
Tim Casey to Peter
Kozinets

11

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 33 of 51

46.

48.

Mario
Letter to Eileen
Rodriguez, Henry
MCSO
w/enc10sures
Legal
Liaison

12/02109 I Mario

Rodriguez,
MCSO
Legal

Response to November
10, 2009 Request for
Information ref:
Melendres v. Arpaio re
Public Records
Requests from Media
outlets relating to
MCSO saturation
patrols/crime
suppression sweeps,
allegations of racial
profiling, or the
administration. of the
MeSO-ICE
Memorandum of
Agreement and the
public records provided
responsive to the
requests from January
2009 to November 12,

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v. Arpmo re
discovery hearing on
sanctions
Response to November ! Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product
10,2009 Request for
Information ref.
Melendres v. Arpaio

12

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 34 of 51

49. I 12117/09 I Tim Casey I E-mail to Chief

50.

I 12/23/09 I Eileen
Henry

Brian Sands,
Irene BarronIrby
cc: Chief David
Hendershott,
Chief
Jack MacIntyre,
andLt Joe
Sousa
E-mail to Chief
David
Hendershott
Cc: Tim Casey

David
Hendershott
cc: ChiefBrian
Sands, Chief
Jack MacIntyre,
Paul Chagolla,
Dot Culhane
(MCSO Legal
Liaison)
52. I 01112110 I Tim Casey I E-mail to
MCSOLegal
Liaison

Melendres v. Arpaio re
search of and for
Arpaio documents

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v. ArpaiolT.
Casey Ltrre
Ortega.pdf re
saturation patrols
related emai1s and
preservation of

! Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

v.
Discovery Dispute
Letter from Peter
Kozinets

Melendres v. ArpaioDiscovery Requests to


MCSO-HELP
NEEDED re MCSO

13

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 35 of 51

Stacey Nowicki,
and Lt. Joseph
Sousa
cc: Chiefs Brian
Sands, David
Hendershott.
Jack ...... __ T_ .....
53.

02/02110 I Michelle
Metzler,
Legal

Liaison

Memorandum to
Tim Casey
w/attachments

J..j-UUI.I.l

to . . . .1l.l<;;J.;:)

David
Hendershott.
Brian Sands,
Jack MacIntyre

55.

02/0311 0 I Tim Casey I E-mail to Jean


Bowman(RM)

Legal Liaison (and


others) work to search
for and gather
documents needed in
response to Request
for Production
MCSO's
Interrogatories re:
Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product
Melendres v. Arpaio

responses from MCSO

personnel

Melendres v. Arpaio
Update on Pending
Plaintiffs' Motion for
Sanctions re Arpaio's
immigration file in his
office; press releases
with Arpaio notes;
letters from legislators
and third parties
requesting saturation
patrols in certain
neighborhoods; HSU
satwation patrol
related e-malls. etc.
Melendres v. Arpaio Update on Pending
Plaintiffs' Motion for
Sanctions re E-mail
above sent FYI.

14

I Att{)rney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 36 of 51

56.

02111110 I Tim Casey E-mail to Stacey


Nowicki, MCSO
Legal Liaison
Cc: Chiefs Brian
Sands, David
Hendershott,
Jack MacIntyre
and Clarisse
McCormick

Melendres v. Arpaio
Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product
(Alleged Racial
Profiling Lawsuit)
MCSO DOCUMENTS
NEEDEDRE
ATTORNEY AND
PROFESSOR KRIS
KOBACH
w/attachment
!n~."'IlU.1"'''

David
Hendershott
Cc: Chiefs Brian
Sands
Jack MacIntyre
w/attachment LT
to T. Casey re

v. ArpaioDocuments Needed
from MCSO Legal
Liason

docs identified. in

Hendershott
02/2511 0

I Pam
Woody,
MCSO
Legal
Liaison

59.

03/02/10 I Tim

Casey

Letter to Tim
Casey

,D-nRlU

David

to Chiefs

Re: Response to
February 11,2010
request for
information ref:
Manuel de Jesus
Melendres re Kris
Koback
Melendres re email
exchange with
Tom Irvine..re

15

Attorney-elient privilege and atto.rney work product

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 37 of 51

60.

Tim
Casey

Casey

62.

I 03/0211 0 I Pam
Woody,

Brian Sands and


MCSO IT person
Shellie Bunn
E-mail to
attorneys for
Maricopa
County
Tom Irvine
Wade Swanson

I Sousa
Cc: Shelly BUIlD.,
MCSOLegal
Liaison
Stacey Nowicki,
Chiefs David
Hendershott,
Brian Sands, and
Jack
Letter to Tim
Casey

MeSO
Legal
Liaison
03/0211 0 I Shelly

Bunn
64.

! 03/0411 0 I Tim
Casey

E-mail to Tim
Casey

Iand
E-mail chain to
from Casey
and Irvine

ICounty archiving of

MCSO electronic mail

MelendresBackground
information requested
by Tom Irvine re OET
November Email

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

s-re

I Email Backup Tapes

Response to February
11,2010 request for
infonnation ref:
Manuel de Jesus

Attomey-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres- addressing
Maricopa County
archiving MCSO
emails
Melendres - OET
Archiving ofMCSO
emails with attached

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

16

IAttorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 38 of 51

forwarded to
Shelly Bunn, and
Chiefs David
Hendershott,
Brian Sands,
Jack
Letter to Tom
Irvine

0310411 0 I Tim

65.

Casey

67.

I 03/18110 I Tim
Casey

IE-mail
to
Richard Stewart
(MCAO)

03/18/10 I Tim
Casey

68.

69.

103/19/10 I Tim
Casey

IRichard

E-mail to
Stewart
forwarding email from Tom
Irvine
Letter to Hon.
Dennis Burke,
U.S. District
Attorney

Judge Rayes Order re


Paying County Bills

Melendres v. Arpaio
re Maricopa County
OET assistance re

Melendres v. Arpaio
Updated Status Report
re Forwarding the email above for review
and file.
Melendres re email
recovery efforts

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

I Attorney-client privilege and attQrney work product

IAttorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Melendres v.
I None
ArpaiolREQUEST
FOR INFORMATION
FROM THE UNITED
STATES
ATTORNEY

17

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 39 of 51

70.

I 03/19/10 I Tim

Melendres - Email
Update recount
download on a hard
drive for all emails

Casey

I Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Additional staffing on
a permanent basis is
needed

72.

I 03/26/10 Richard
Stewart

73.

I 03/26/10 Tim
Casey

74.

I 04113110 I Richard
Stewart

75.

I 07/27110 I Tim
Casey

Data Process
Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product
Melendres - Authority
Requested re key word
search of archived
email
Ortega
Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product
Melendres/Arpaio Letter from Peter
Kozmets

E-mail to Chiefs
David
Hendershott,
Brian Sands
w/attached letter
E-mail to Tim

Data Process

Casey

Melendres Authority

IE-mail
to Chief
David
Hendershott
wiattached letter
from Andrew

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Requested re key word


search of archive
email
Melendres v. Arpaio:
Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product
Letter re Outstanding
Issues HELP
NEEDED re Jesus
Cosme materials

18

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 40 of 51

---

--

76.

07/30/10 Tim
Casey

E-mail to
Richard Stewart

77.

07130/10

78.

08/02/10 Tim
Casey

E-mail to Chief
David
Hendershott
cc: Eric Dowell
E-mail to Chief
David
Hendershott
cc: Eric Dowell,
Esq.

Tim
Casey

Melendesv.
ArpaiolLtr with
materials re status
report re archived
Melendres v.
Arpaio/Carve Out
MCSO Archived
Email hard drive
Melendres: MCSO
update re Archived
Emails and Consultant
XACT production to
plaintiffs - Update Re
Transition to Eric
Dowell

19

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

Attorney-client privilege and attorney work product

------~

----

..

-.-~

....... - . -

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 41 of 51

EXHIBIT 5

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 42 of 51


CECILLIA D. WANG
DIRECTOR
IMMIGRANTS'
RIGHTS PROJECT

f!t4WI

AMERICAN CIVIL LlUI-'lnIE'. lINION

June 16,2015

Via Electronic Mail


Karen Clark
Adams & Clark PC
520 E. Portland St., Ste. 200
Phoenix, AZ 85004
karen@adamsclarkcom
Re:

Ortega Melendres v. Arpaio, No. CV 2007-02513-PHX-GMS

AMERICAN CIVil liBERTIES

UNION FOUNDATION
CALIFORNIA OFFICE
39 DRUMM STREET
SAN I'RANCISCO, CA9411'4805
T/415.343.0775
F/415.395.0950

CWANGlaACLU.ORG

I write in response to your letters of May 21, 2015 and June 9,2015, to
Stan Young and Michele Iafrate, concerning Plaintiffs' subpoena duces tecum
appended to the deposition subpoena we served upon your client, Tim Casey.
As you know, Plaintiffs requested that Mr. Casey produce three categories of
documents correlating to the three charged grounds for contempt.

NEW YORK OFFICE


125 BROAD STREET, 18TH FL.

NEW YORK. NY 100042400


WWW.ACLU.ORG

In your letter of May 21, you indicated that Mr. Casey conducted a
search for responsive documents relating to the December 23,2011
preliminary injunction and the May 14,2014 court order pertaining to the
collection of MCSO video recordings, and that he provided those documents
to Michele Iafrate and would not produce any ofthem to Plaintiffs without her
clients' approval. In your letter of June 9,2015, you indicated that Mr. Casey
searched for documents relating to the pretrial discovery issue and similarly
would not produce any documents from his case file without Ms.. Iafrate's
review and Sheriff Arpaio's approval. You further stated that Mr. Casey's
position is that because he turned over his entire case file to the Defendants, it
would be unduly burdensome for him to produce documents in response to
Plaintiffs' request. You provided a priviJege log but indicated that you intend
to file a motion to quash on Mr. Casey's behalf if Plaintiffs continue to seek
documents from him.
Plaintiffs' position is that Mr. Casey has an independent obligation to
search for and t() produce documents in response to the subpoena duces
tecum. While we recognize that there are potential privilege issues that will
require the participation of Ms. Iafrate, we do not believe that absolves Mr.
Casey of his independent duty to respond to Plaintiffs' subpoena.
In addition, we must question the adequacy of Mr. Casey's search
based upon the privilege logs you provided. For example, the privilege log
relating to the pretrial discovery issue lists documents only up through August
2010. In addition, the list of documents relating to the preliminary injunction

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 43 of 51

Karen Clark
June 16.2015
Page 2

AMERICAN CIVil liBERTIES


UNION FOUNDATION

includes only six documents, which on its face, and based on other documents
produced by MCSO (e.g., Sergeant Palmer's "training scenarios" and
discussions in the fall of2012), does not seem likely to capture all of the
documents that Mr. Casey would have as the Defendants' counsel with
respect to the issue ofthe preHminary injunction order. It also does not
include any reference to time or billing records, as requested. Similarly, it
does not seem plausible that Mr. Casey only had five documents relating to
the May 14, 2014 court order. We wonder whether a complete search of Mr.
Casey's electronic files. including backup files and document archives, has
been done. These might include documents that were not in the official "file"
that Mr. Casey.provided to Ms. Iafrate.
In short, it appears that Mr. Casey's search was not adequate, and
Plaintiffs do intend to pursue responsive documents from Mr. Casey. We
remain willing to meet and confer further on this issue if you believe it would
be helpful prior to the filing of a motion to quash.
Sincerely,

Cecillia Wang
Counsel for Plaintiffs
cc:

Michele Iafrate
Rick Walker
Greg Como

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 44 of 51

EXHIBIT 6

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 45 of 51

ADAMS & CLARK,

PC

June 18.2015
SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ONLY
Adame" Clark, PC
Attorneys at Law

CeciUia D. Wang, Director


ACLU Immigrants' Rights Prqject
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco. CA 94 I I 1-4805
Email: cwal1@aclu.org
Re:

Melendres, et al. v. Arpaio,

520 East Portland Street


Phoenix, Arizona 85004-1843

el al.: Case No.

CV-07-025130-PHX-GMS

602 258-3542
602 258-1377 FAX
~ad8msclar~c~m

Dear Ms. Wang:


In response to your letter dated June 16. 2015, Mr. Casey understands and
appreciates his obligations concerning the subpoenas issued to him. In fact, I am
advising him on his duties in response to the subpoenas and to his fonner clients.
Mr. Casey has previously provided you with a detailed listing of the universe of
potentially responsive documents that he has at his finn in regards to the December
23,2011 Preliminary Injunction and the May 14,2014 Court Order (as well as the
Grissom-related information sought by your original subpoena). While you
question the adequacy of Mr. Casey's searcQ on those subjects, the fad is Mr.
Casey's search was extensive, exhaustive. expensive and complete. The search
included his firm's electronic files. including backup files and document archives.
You have a list of what he has on those subjec~. He cannot give .you what he does
not have. If other docunlents exist, he does not have them and they are not on his
firm's system. In summary, your statement that "it appears that Mr. Casey's search
was not adequate" is mistaken.
As for the privilege issues on these subject matters, that is for you and defense
counsel to resolve. Mr. Casey is not at liberty to produce documents from his list of
potentially responsive documents that his fonner clients claim are protected from
disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work-product priVilege. When you
and defense counsel resolve the privilege issues, or the Court rules on such issues,
then - and only then - can Mr. Casey properly and ethically produce documents.
Regarding documents for which there is no privilege asserted by Mr. Casey's
former clients. or docunlents i"()r which the Court has already ruled that privilege is
waived, then Mr. Casey obviously can directly produce those documents prior to his
deposition. I expect that you and defense counsel will provide me with a list of the
documents included in Mr. Casey's prior lists. which the parties have agreed may be
produced by Mr. Casey.

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 46 of 51


June /8. 20/5
Page 2

ADAMS & CLARK,

In regards to your stated concern about the pretrial discovery search conducted by
Mr. Casey in response to your latest subpoena, you have been provided a detailed
privilege log of the dOCWllcnts that Mr. Casey believes may be potentially
responsive. It is unreasonable and unduly burdensome (and expensive) to ask him
to continue to search for specific documents that may be or may not be on his finn's
electronic system for a time period ranging multiple years. As for your specific
concern that the "privilege log relating to the pretrial discovery issue lists documents
only up through August 2010" - that concern is misplaced. Mr. Casey advises me
that he withdrew from the case 011 August 13, 2010 and did not again make an
appearance in the case until December 21, 2010. He therefore lacks documents for
the time period he was not counsel on the case. When Mr. Casey returned to the
case in late 2010, I am advised that fact discovery had ended and expert deposition
discovery only was taking place. As such, he lacks other potentially responsive
documents to include in his privilege log.
After you have a chance to consider the foregoing, please call me to discuss. After
we meet and confer, and if we cmmot agree, then Mr. Casey will file a Motion to
Quash the subpoena as to the pretrial discovery issue to the extent you are requiring
Mr. Casey do anything in addition to producing for you the detailed discovery
related privilege log he has provided. The grounds for such motion will center on
undue burden and expense. On the other hand, there may be a potential solution to
this issue. That issue centers on who bears the cost of the additional work. you seem
to want performed. Are plainti tfs' willing to compensate Mr. Casey and his firm for
their time in doing the additional work you seek? If so we might be able to reach an
agreement on a not~to~exceed amount. Please advise.
Finally, based on the competing interests of Plaintiffs and Mr. Casey's fonner
clients, it bears repeating that it is important - if not essential- that the Court attend
Mr. Casey's deposition whenever it is reset. Absent the Court's attendance to make
real-time rulings on obje('1iolls and instructions not to answer on the grounds of
privilege or client confidentiality by either defense counselor me, there is a real risk
the deposition will prove a waste of time. As you might expect, my client wants to
avoid mUltiple or piecemeal depositions.
Sincerely,

~
KC:bt
cc: Client
Michele Iafrate
Rick Walker
Greg Como

PC

Adam. & Clark, PC


Attorneys at Law
520 East Portland Street
Phoenix, Arlzona8S004-1843

60226....3542
602 258-13n FAX

lNWW.sdamsclalk.com

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 47 of 51

EXHIBIT 7

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 48 of 51


CECILLIA D. WANG
DIRECTOR
IMMIGRANTS'
RIGHTS PROJECT

IIMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

June 19,2015

Via Electronic Mail


Karen Clark
Adams & Clark PC
Michele Iafrate
Iafrate & Associates
Re:
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION FOUNDATION
CALJFORNIA OFFICE

Ortega Melendres v. Arpaio, No. CV-07-2S13-GMS

Dear Karen and Michele:

39 DRUMM STREET
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111-4805
T/415.343.0715
F/'15_395.0950
CWANOriiACLU.ORG

I write in response to Karen's letter of June 18, 2015. Thank you for
your quick response.

NEW YORK OFFICE


125 BROAD STREET, 18TH Flo

First, on the adequacy of Mr. Casey's search, we do not doubt that Mr.
Casey understands his obligations under the subpoenas that Plaintiffs have
served upon him. I hope he understands our concerns about the adequacy of
the search are based upon the known existence of documents that we have
obtained from the Defendants, which should also be in his possession.
However, at this time, based upon his representations in Karen's letter of June
18, we will not take further action but will reserve the issue for a later time.

NEW YORK, NY 10004-2400


WWW.ACLU.ORG

As for the privilege issues, we understand Mr. Casey's position that


Michele and her clients should undertake that priviIegereview. I therefore
direct this letter to Michele, as well. Please let us know whether that review is
underway and whether and when Defendants will agree to production of any
of the documents on the privilege log. In light ofthe Court's prior rulings on
privilege issues, we expect that both your clients will agree to pr.oduce some
ofthose documents and we request that you do so expeditiously so that we can
be ready to take Mr. Casey's deposition at the earliest opportunity after the
Sheriff's recusal motion is decided.
Sincerely,

Cecillia Wang
Counsel for Plaintiffs

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 49 of 51

Karen Clark and Michele Iafrate


June 19.2015
Page 2

cc:

AMERICAN ClVIlll8ERTIES
ONION FOUNDATION

Rick Walker
Greg Como

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 50 of 51

EXHIBITS

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1206-1 Filed 07/30/15 Page 51 of 51

ADAMS & CLARK,

PC

June 22, 2015

SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ONLY


Cecillia D. Wang, Director
ACLU hnmisrants' Rights Project
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco. CA 94111-4805
Email: cwCUW@aclu.ore

Adame a Clark" PC

Attomeya at Law

520 East Portland Street


Phoenix. ArIzona 85004-1843
e0228a.. .
802 Z5&-1377FAX
~OOIII

Melendres, et al. v. Arpaw, et aL; Case No. CV'()7-025130PHX"(}MS

Re:

Dear Ms. Wang:


I am in receipt of your letter dated June 19, 2015, in which you state:

First, on the adequacy of Mr. Casey's search, we do not doubt that Mr.
Casey understands his obligations under the subpoenas that Plaintiffs
have served upon him. I hope he understands our concerns about the
adequacy of the search are based upon the .known existence of
documents that we have obtained from the Defendants, which should
also be in his possession.

If you will provide me with either: (1) the documents you base your concern on or;
(2) their date and author, Mr. Casey agrees to conduct a pinpoint search for whether
he has such documents on his finn's electronic system, or whether they are in the
case file he tumed over to successor counsel, and no longer in his possession.

1look forward to hearing from you.


Sincerely;

~CkL
Karen Clark
KC:bt
00: Oient

Michele Iafrate

Rick Walker

Greg Como