Leave nothing uncovered. Leave nothing to chance.

Teacher vs School – general status updates re: mood are not relevant to claims for emotional distress

 

Read the order here.

Giacchetto v. Patchogue Social Media

 

THERESA GIACCHETTO vs. PATCHOGUE-MEDFORD SCHOOL DISTRICT (Teacher) (Employer)

I am suing you for disability discrimination and inter alia physical and emotional damages You have ADHD. I have ADHD. Doctor Teacher Teacher Principal Defendant’s Motion to Compel Social Networking is relevant: Evidence of physical and emotional damages levels of social interaction and daily functioning emotional and psychological state Accounts of events alleged in complaint are discoverable Plaintiff’s Reply That motion is a Fishing Expedition Harass Impinge Privacy A B While the relevance of a posting reflecting engagement in a physical activity that would not be feasible given the plaintiff’s claimed physical injury is obvious, the relationship of routine expressions of mood to a claim for emotional distress damages is much more tenuous. Let’s parse this: Connection between physical activity and physical injury is obvious. The connection between mood and emotional distress is tenuous While the relevance of a posting reflecting engagement in a physical activity that would not be feasible given the plaintiff’s claimed physical injury is obvious, the relationship of routine expressions of mood to a claim for emotional distress damages is much more tenuous. Emotional well-being Routine status updates are not generally relevant to a claim of emotional distress. Plaintiff must produce specific references to distress alleged in the complaint. Intended to and Postings that are inconsistent with claimed physical injury are relevant and must be produced. Physical health Physical injury Emotional injury & are different Legal Analysis