Lazaridis v. International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children, Inc.
760 F. Supp. 2d 109
D.D.C.2011Background
- Petitioner Emmanuel N. Lazaridis seeks discovery under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 from ICMEC and NCMEC for use in Greek investigations/prosecutions.
- The Greek proceedings involve a criminal prosecution against Ernie Allen and others before the Three-Member Magistrates Court of Athens and a related penal investigation by Greek authorities.
- Lazaridis claims to be a complainant and civil party with the right to submit information and request relief from the Greek courts.
- Respondents argue Lazaridis is an interested person but that most requests are not tailored to the Greek proceedings and would burden them.
- The court ultimately denies Lazaridis’ application while finding § 1782 authority exists at least for the Greek investigation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court has authority to grant § 1782 discovery | Lazaridis as an interested person seeks records needed for Greek investigations | Respondents contend not all requests relate to Greek proceedings and lack reasonable contemplation | CourtAuthority present for Greek investigation; foreign-proceeding prerequisite satisfied |
| Whether the court should exercise discretion to grant discovery | Discovery will aid Greek authorities (broadly) | Requests are overly broad, burdensome, and not tailored to the Greek proceedings | Court exercises discretion to deny due to burden and lack of tailored relevance |
| Whether respondents are proper targets of discovery given their role | Respondents are participants with information | Respondents may already provide info via Greek authorities; not necessary private action | Respondents’ participation weighs against granting discovery |
| Whether the scope of the requests is permissible | Requests cover documents about Lazaridis and Not-Missing Children | Requests are vague, unbounded, and would require legal conclusions | Scope too broad; denied |
| Whether the Greek prosecution mechanism permits private § 1782 help | Private citizens can assist via § 1782 | Greek system relies on Public Prosecutor; no private right to demand evidence | Greek authorities have discretion; § 1782 assistance not warranted for broad fishing expeditions |
Key Cases Cited
- Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (U.S. 2004) (discretionary testing of § 1782 requests; not mandatory)
- Norex Petroleum Ltd. v. Chubb Ins. Co. of Canada, 384 F.Supp.2d 45 (D.D.C.2005) (twin aims of § 1782; factors for discretion)
- Schmitz v. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP, 376 F.3d 79 (2d Cir.2004) (three-factor test for authority under § 1782)
- Linder v. Calero-Portocarrero, 251 F.3d 178 (D.C.Cir.2001) (definition of 'person' for § 1782)