Art’s attorneys are not happy about the School District’s tardy refusal to provide them with any evidence.
April 29, 2015
[also]VIA EMAILHon. Myron Greenberg
District Court Judge, Retired
9137 Medley Circle
Golden Valley, MN 55427Re: I.S.D. 709 vs. Art Johnston
Our File No. 6949-1Dear Judge Greenberg:
On February 28, 2015, you sent an email to counsel inquiring about whether the parties agreed to use the rules of the Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings under the Minnesota Administrative Procedures Act. You also inquired about where the hearing would be held, whether the proceedings would be transcribed by a court reporter or by other means, and whether the parties wanted written or oral closing arguments.
On March 3, 2015, I responded with a letter to Messrs. Anderson and Edison advising that Mr. Johnston wanted the proceedings to be held under the Rules of Civil Procedure rather than the administrative hearing rules. I asked if they concurred. I also mentioned that there may be other administrative and procedural issues that you might wish to address with pretrial orders.
I heard nothing from the Board’s counsel about these matters until yesterday, eight working days prior to the scheduled hearing date, when Mr. Anderson advised me by letter that the Board objects to using the Rules of Civil Procedure and will ask you to adopt the administrative hearing rules, stripped of their discovery provisions. Mr. Anderson’s letter did not address any other pretrial matters, like, for example, exchange of witness lists, exhibit lists, proposed findings, motions in limine, or other matters commonly addressed by a pretrial order.
In addition, the Board has refused to provide us as Mr. Johnston’s counsel with materials created during Mary Rice’s four-month investigation, which culminated with her October 31, 2014 report. These include an unredacted copy of the exhibits to her report and any transcripts or interview notes. The Board has claimed the Data Practices Act is the basis for their refusal. We are now requesting that you issue an order under Minn. Stat. § 13.03, Subd. 6, to compel the Board to provide us with the information requested and that is necessary for any defense, specifically, unredacted copies of, the Rice report, its exhibits, and her interview notes and any transcripts, in unredacted form. I am enclosing a proposed order accomplishing this result and imposing protective conditions on the use of the data thus disclosed. The proposed order was drafted by counsel for the Board.
I am sure that there are other matters that you can address prior to the hearing that would expedite and simplify the hearing and perhaps the issues to be decided. I therefor ask that you schedule and conduct a pretrial conference in the next week to consider the adoption of procedural rules, require the identification of witnesses and exhibits, resolve our request for access to the RRice report and its supporting materials and address other issues that you deem appropriate.
Sincerely,
Frederick E. Finch
cc: Scott T. Anderson, Esq.
John P. Edison, Esq.
Art Johnston
