Carter v. City of New York et al
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER: I affirm Judge Tiscione's discovery order in full. Ordered by Judge Ann M. Donnelly on 12/15/2016. (Greene, Donna)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
CITY OF NEW YORK,POLICE OFFICER
DARRELL WALLACE,POLICE OFFICER
ABRAHAM HIDALGO,POLICE OFFICER
AHMED,POLICE OFFICER CAROL PETINAUD,
IN CLERK'S OFFICE
us DISTRICT COURT E.D.N.Y.
SERGEANT DANIELLE DAVIS,SERGEANT
WIL PELLEGRINO,and SERGEANT lAMES
ANN M.DONNELLY,District ludge.
The pro se plaintiff, Michael Carter, appeals from Magistrate Judge Steven Tiscione's
order denying his motion to compel document production more thantwo years after the close of
discovery.' For the reasons that follow,I affirm Judge Tiscione's discovery order in full.
The standard ofreview regarding a non-dispositive ruling by a magistratejudge is
"highly deferential." Shipkevich v. Staten Island Univ. Hasp.,No.08-CV-1008 FB JMA,2012
WL 4442621,at *I(E.D.N.Y. Sept. 25,2012). The Court will only set aside an order 'that is
clearly erroneous or is contrary to law."'Id.(citing 28 U.S.C.§ 636(b)(1)(A);Fed. R.Civ.P.
72(a); Thomas E. Hoar. Inc. v. Sara Lee Corp.,900 F.2d 522,525(2d Cir. 1990))."Magistrate
judges have broad discretion in resolving discovery matters, and a party seeking to overtum a
discovery order 'generally bears a heavy burden.'"Id (quoting Mental Disability Law Clinic v.
.Discove.yendedonMay2,2014. (S..Minute En^.Febnia^ 28.20^
prooetol history of
the case is set forth in my Order denying the plaintiffs motion to amend his complaint.(Dkt. No. .)
s/Ann M. Donnelly
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?