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This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllAttorneys 'On the Move': Structured Finance Attorney Joins Hunton Andrews Kurth; Foley Adds IP Partner
4 minute readNY Civil Liberties Legal Director Stepping Down After Lengthy Tenure
Former Top Aide to NYC Mayor Is Charged With Bribery Conspiracy
Trending Stories
- 1Revisiting the Boundaries Between Proper and Improper Argument: 10 Years Later
- 2Hochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
- 3Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
- 4Biden commutes sentences for 37 of 40 federal death row inmates, including two convicted of California murders
- 5Avoiding Franchisor Failures: Be Cautious and Do Your Research
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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