Transcript in Last Zane Seipler Wrongful Termination Court Hearing – Part 10

Christmas Eve, McHenry County Blog ran the first part of the December 15, 2010, transcript of a Rockford hearing before Magistrate P. Michael Mahoney.

December 25th, the second part was published with the third installment published Sunday. Part 4 went up Monday, Part 5 Tuesday, Part 6 Wednesday, Part 7 Thursday, Part 8 Friday and Part 9 Saturday.

January 2nd brings us to the last installment, Part 10. Whether or not to seal McHenry County Sheriff’s Deputy Scott Milliman’s deposition is the main topic.

MR. HORWITZ: Judge, the motion that I filed, I sent it to you with a footnote. The question is is that under seal, the motion that I submitted to you, the motion for extension of time.

THE COURT: The motion that you — the hard copy of a motion that you send to me never makes the court file. You have to CMF file.

MR. HORWITZ: I understand. I know that. I sent it to you for purposes of I was coming in right now and you saying —

THE COURT: Nothing you send to me ever reaches the court file. So, you don’t have to put anything under seal that you send me.

MR. HORWITZ: What I meant to say is I have not filed that motion because there’s issues in the motion that are sensitive. And so, I ask the question is that —

THE COURT: It sounds sensitive to me.

MR. HORWITZ: So, the question is whether or not that should be publicly disclosed information because people have a right to know, in my humble opinion, or whether or not that should be filed under seal. So, I’m here to ask you that question right now so I don’t violate any order.

THE COURT: I haven’t entered one yet.


MR. SOTOS: We think the document should be under seal, Judge.

THE COURT: Boy, I tend to think the same thing, but I’m not sure the Seventh Circuit does.

MR. SOTOS: Well, these are some really —

MR. HORWITZ: Do you want to brief that issue?

MR. SOTOS: This stuff is coming up in the context of a lawsuit. Discovery is not public. These allegations are so far out there and potentially so damaging that we think it’s extraordinary enough that it should be kept under seal and that this shouldn’t turn into a big public brouhaha based on one person’s —

THE COURT: Do you want it under seal, too, or do you want it not under seal?

MR. HORWITZ: No. I think the public has a right to know.

THE COURT: I understand. You give me seven days to submit cases to me that says it should be under seal. You have the same seven days to submit cases that indicates that it shouldn’t be under seal.

MR. SOTOS: That’s fine, Judge.

THE COURT: They’re the same cases we all read in the Seventh Circuit, but I’ll want to take a look at them again.

You give whatever twist you think is appropriate for under seal, and you give yours. When do you want to come back here?

MR. HORWITZ: Whenever you like, Judge.

THE COURT: Well, I’m thinking late January. Do you want a special setting, or do you want me to put you with the general call? The case behind you at 2:00 o’clock would rather a special setting, I think, right now.

MR. SOTOS: I appreciate that, Judge. And if that suits the court better, we’re happy to do it that way.

MR. HORWITZ: My guess is — I don’t know, Judge. I really don’t know. My guess is we’ll —

THE COURT: My guess is you’re about done, and it’s not going to be that bad from this point forward. You don’t have much left.

MR. HORWITZ: I tend to agree.

THE COURT: What’s the 28th look like? Is that pretty light?

THE CLERK: January?

THE COURT: Yes. That still gives me some time to maneuver just in case you got a problem, somebody didn’t show up for the deposition.

THE CLERK: You already have something at 2:00 o’clock. You have a final pretrial conference. Right now it’s not heavy.

THE COURT: Why don’t I give you 2:30 that day.

MR. HORWITZ: What day?

THE COURT: 1-28, 2011, 2:30 in the afternoon. Give me any Rule 37 motions in time that I can try to rule upon them then.

Counsels, you have a great holiday. I’m done for the day.

MR. SOTOS: Thanks for your patience, Judge.

THE COURT: I’m done for the day, counsel. You had enough time.

MR. SOTOS: Thanks for your patience

MR. HORWITZ: Okay. Well, we’ll present it by way of motion then, I guess.

THE COURT: I don’t know, but you’re not getting it today.

MR. HORWITZ: All right. Thanks, Judge.

THE COURT: Have a great day, counsels.

(Which were all the proceedings had in the above-entitled cause on the day and date aforesaid.)

I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the tape-recording of proceedings in the above-entitled matte

Mary T. Lindbloom
Official Court Reporter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *