Judge Denies Bid to Secure More Info on NYPD Cellphone Tracking
“It's crystal clear that if this court were to disclose the names of the Stingray devices, that would provide the bad actors with the capabilities of the NYPD's technology,” the judge said.
April 12, 2018 at 05:01 PM
2 minute read
A Manhattan judge has decided against compelling the New York City Police Department to comply with a request for information about its “Stingray” cellphone tracking devices, reasoning that disclosure could empower criminals to better avoid capture.
Ruling from the bench on Wednesday, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Shlomo Hagler dismissed the New York Civil Liberties Union's Article 78 proceeding, which it filed in 2016 after the NYPD did provide all the information that the NYCLU asked for through a Freedom of Information Law request about the department's use of cell-site simulators, such as how many of the devices the department purchased and how much it paid for them.
The NYPD did release purchase agreements for the devices, but did not disclose prices and model numbers.
“It's crystal clear that if this court were to disclose the names of the Stingray devices, that would provide the bad actors with the capabilities of the NYPD's technology,” Hagler said while ruling to deny the NYCLU's petition, according to a transcript of the proceedings. “They can then use that to evade detection.”
Assistant Corporation Counsels Neil Giovanatti and Thomas Roberts appeared for the city. Nicholas Paolucci, a spokesman for the city's Law Department, said that Hagler “perfectly summarized” the NYPD's position in the case.
NYCLU attorney Robert Hodgson said in an interview that the organization is considering if it will appeal the ruling. He said, though, that Hagler's ruling is inconsistent with other courts' jurisprudence, arguing that various law enforcement agencies at the federal, state and local levels—including the Erie County Sheriff's Office and the New York State Police—have turned over the type of information that the NYCLU seeks from the NYPD.
“We think it's disappointing that the court has allowed the NYPD to maintain its culture of secrecy and withhold what is really basic information about the surveillance tools they use across our communities,” Hodgson said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Denies Retrial Bid by Ex-U.S. Sen. Menendez Over Evidentiary Error
What Businesses Need to Know About Anticipated FTC Leadership Changes
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Who Are the Judges Assigned to Challenges to Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order?
- 2Litigators of the Week: A Directed Verdict Win for Cisco in a West Texas Patent Case
- 3Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 4Womble Bond Becomes First Firm in UK to Roll Out AI Tool Firmwide
- 5Will a Market Dominated by Small- to Mid-Cap Deals Give Rise to a Dark Horse US Firm in China?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250