ORDER Can the Court compel non-party Suffolk County District Attorney to produce sealed documents concerning a prior criminal investigation against Defendant over Defendant’s objection? Plaintiffs’ latest discovery motion tees up that precise question. Plaintiffs Silver Sands Motel Inc. (“Silver Sands”), Jean Jurenzia Burden (“Burden”), and Richard Terry Keefe, IV (“Keefe”) commenced this civil action pursuant to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §1962, et seq., alleging that pro se Defendant Jerry M. Mims1 along with Defendants Long Island Capital Management, Eric Friedlander, Peter Schembri, and Does 1-52 violated the RICO Act by, inter alia, fraudulently inducing Plaintiffs into executing mortgages and keeping or using the proceeds of the mortgages for their benefit. Plaintiffs now move to compel the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office (“DA”), a non-party to this case, to produce documents related to a past criminal investigation of Mims purportedly arising out of the same transactions and occurrences complained of in this civil matter. The DA opposes Plaintiffs’ motion in the form of a motion to quash. For the reasons that follow, Plaintiffs’ motion to compel (DE 34) is GRANTED and the DA’s motion to quash (DE 40) is DENIED. BACKGROUND The following allegations are drawn from the complaint (DE 1.). In short, Plaintiffs allege that in 2008 Mims approached Burden about investing in a real estate deal. (Id. 45.) Burden responded that she was not interested but instead wanted to borrow a negative pledge3 as she regularly did to support Silver Sands during the winter. (Id.) This pledge would have essentially prohibited her from “creating any security interests over certain property in a specified contract provision.” (Id.) Plaintiffs allege that instead of securing a negative pledge for $300,000, Mims had Burden sign a mortgage for $750,000. (Id. 47.) Plaintiffs allege that this occurred because Burden suffers from ocular histoplasmosis, resulting in severely impaired vision. (Id. 49.) Burden thus claims to have relied on Mims to read the documents for her, allowing him to lie about the entirety of their contents and execute this and other mortgages. (Id.
