Jones v. Maples

OPINION OF THE COURT

Saxe, J.

The order of the IAS Court authorizing plaintiff pro se, Chuck Jones, to conduct a videotaped deposition of defendant Marla Maples, albeit with the protection presumably provided by the presence of a Judicial Hearing Officer (JHO), must be reversed. In these truly unique circumstances, permitting Jones to proceed with a videotaped deposition of Maples is a frightening prospect, and constitutes an improvident exercise of discretion.

Chuck Jones alleges that in 1987 he was retained by Marla Maples as a combination personal manager, press agent, accountant, tax adviser…