United States District Court, District of Columbia
COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
before the Court is Defendant District of Columbia's 
Written Objections to Magistrate Judge Robin M.
Meriweather's Memorandum Opinion and Orders Dated
February 15, 2019 and February 22, 2019
(“District's Objs.”). The District of
Columbia (“District”) argues that Magistrate
Judge Meriweather's Orders as to two discovery disputes
were clearly erroneous. Upon consideration of the pleadings
and the record as a whole, this Court OVERRULES the
District's Objections and AFFIRMS Magistrate Judge
Meriweather's February 15, 2019 and February 22, 2019
Memorandum Opinions and Orders.
Defendant Darrell L. Best pleaded guilty to sexually
assaulting Plaintiff Jaquia Buie and was sentenced to
eighteen years in prison, Buie brought this suit against both
Best and the District of Columbia. See Buie v. District
of Columbia, 273 F.Supp.3d 65, 66 (D.D.C. 2017). She
alleges various claims, including constitutional claims under
42 U.S.C. § 1983 and tort claims for intentional
infliction of emotional distress, negligence, negligent
entrustment, negligent retention, and negligent infliction of
emotional distress against the District. See Compl.
¶¶ 44- 126. In particular, Buie alleges that the
District was negligent in its training, supervision, and
discipline of officers, including Best, leading to an
environment that facilitated Best's assault. See
id. ¶¶ 76-102. For instance, Buie claims
that the District “failed to terminate Best after he
misused his position as sergeant and sexually coerced a
female cadet for his own personal benefit in violation of
[Metropolitan Police Department] regulations.”
Id. ¶ 97. Her claims therefore concern the
District's investigations and other actions taken in
response to complaints about officer misconduct.
District objects to two of Magistrate Judge Meriweather's
determinations. First, the District objects to Magistrate
Judge Meriweather's February 15, 2019 Memorandum Opinion
and Order concerning a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition. Buie
previously served the District with a Notice of Deposition
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
30(b)(6). Pl.'s Mot. to Compel Deposition at 2.
One of the topics noticed was:
The investigative records and all other documents the
District of Columbia produced in connection with
investigation of allegations of sexual misconduct/harassment
by sworn MPD members, including but not limited to, records
from the Internal Affairs Bureau, Office of Professional
Responsibility, Office of Citizen Complaint Review, and from
Chain of Command Misconduct Investigations, located using the
keyword “sex” in the PPMS system from 2006 to the
present, EEO files from 1998 to the present, and
investigatory records pertaining to the two (2) confirmed
incidents involving Best's training classmates.
District's Objs. Ex. 2, at 3. Another topic covered any
“disciplinary files” or “other documents
having to do with the hiring, promotion, demotion, transfer,
training, supervision, termination, or resignation” of
Best. Id. Yet a third topic included the methodology
and procedures used by the Metropolitan Police Department
regarding the “promotion, demotion, transfer, training,
supervision, or termination of its members.”
December 12, 2018, counsel for Buie deposed one of the
District's designated Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses, Sylvan
Altieri. Pl.'s Notice to the Court, ECF No. 66,
Ex. 2 at 1. Altieri testified that he had prepared for his
deposition by reviewing documents for approximately fifteen
hours, including reviewing some of the paperwork provided to
him to prepare. District's Objs. Ex. 1 (“Altieri
Tr.”) at 13:19-16:12. Around this point in the
deposition, counsel for Buie asked Altieri specific questions
about what he had reviewed:
Q: Did you look at the Renit Jones [case]?
A: I believe I did, sir, yes.
Q: Did you look at the Janice Lee case?
A: I don't recall if I did or not, sir.
Q: Do you know what those cases pertain to?
A: I don't recall, sir.
Q: You don't recall what they ...