Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-01254-Gl\/IS Document 17 Filed 08/10/2005 Page 1 of 2
F21cz-rnrioss, Layton 8. Fimcaaa
A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
Om: Roowszv Saunas
QED NDNTH KING STREET
JQHN A P;`|=gK;Ng_ Jin WILMINGTON, DELAWARE I9BOl
DIRECTOR (302) 65i_77OO I:"ARKlN5@FiLF COM
r-wr caoai eemvoi
WW\N..F?LF“.COM
August l0, 2005
VIA HAND DELIVERY AND CM/ECI?
The Honorabie Gregory M. Sleet
United States District Court
District of Delaware
844 King Street
J. Caleb Boggs Federal Building
Lockbox 19
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: Estate of Hargjy Smith, IH, et al. v. Wilmington Police Department,
(LA. No. 04·I254~GMS
Dear Judge Sleet:
Please consider this letter a status report and a joint request for a Rule 16 Scheduling
Conference.
A. Background and Status
This case arises from the death of Harry Smith, lll, who was allegedly shot by
Wilmington police officers. Plaintiffs, the estate of the decedent and the decedent’s parents,
allege both Federal Civil Rights and State Law claims. The current defendants are the
Wilmington Police Department and Chief Michael Szezerba. Plaintiffs also allege claims against
defendants simply identitied as ".Iohn Doe." Defendant Szczerba tiled an answer in which he
denied the material allegations against him and defendant Wilmington Police Department moved
to dismiss the claims against it.
Prior to filing the instant action, plaintiffs tiled a miscellaneous action pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 32 seeking leave to take discovery in advance of filing a complaint and also seeking an
order compelling respondents to preserve evidence. (Smith v. Mosley, No. 04·—i\/IC-76). One of
the respondents in the miscellaneous action was the City of Wilmington, which moved to dismiss
plaintiffs’ application. The miscellaneous action was later consolidated with the instant matter.
There are two motions currently pending before the Court ~~ the aforementioned
Wilmington Police Departmenfs Motion to Dismiss and the City of Wil1nington’s Motion to
Dismiss the miscellaneous action. Those matters have been fully briefed, but because of the
lieavy demands placed on the Court’s time, the Court has not yet had an opportunity to resolve
those motions. The Court has likewise not had an opportunity to conduct a scheduling
ruin-zvszzsa-t

Case 1:04-cv-01254-Gl\/IS Document 17 Filed 08/10/2005 Page 2 of 2
The Honorable Gregory M. Sleet
August 10, 2005
Page 2
conference with respect to the claims against defendant Szczerba; both sides assume it has not
done so because it wished to resolve the pending motions first.
B. Recently Filed Stigulation
The parties are filing a stipulation which, among other things, dismisses the claims
against the Wilmington Police Department with prejudice and dismisses the claims in the
miscellaneous action without prejudice. The claims against defendant Szczerba are tmaffected
by the stipulation, and plaintiffs have indicated they may seek to add other individuals as
defendants. Needless to say, if the court signs this stipulation the pending motions will he
resolved.
C. Reguest for a Scheduling Conference
Assuming the Court signs the stipulation, both sides respectfully ask the Court to conduct
a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference at a time convenient to it.
Respectfully
L A “%
A. Parkins, Jr. (#859
JAP/lll
Enclosure
cc: Kester LH. Crosse, Esquire (w/e) (By Hand Delivery)
Anne T. Sulton, Esquire (wfe) (By U.S. Regular Mail)
Rosemarie Tassone, Esquire (w/e)
1n.ri-zvszzsz»1