Laurent v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP et al

Filing 81

ORDER: Plaintiffs moved, pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56(f), for an order refusing defendants' application for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiffs lack the discovery necessary to oppose the motion. Accordingly, plaintiffs' motion, pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56(f), is denied. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 3/27/2009) (jpo) Modified on 4/17/2009 (jpo).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------x TIMOTHY D. LAURENT, et al., , Plaintiffs, -againstPRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP, et al., Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------x GEORGE B. DANIELS, District Judge:

ORDER 06 CV 2280 (GBD)

Plaintiffs moved, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(f), for an order refusing defendants' application for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiffs lack the discovery necessary to oppose the motion.1 Plaintiffs filed their Rule 56(f) motion simultaneously with their filing of a twenty-five page opposition memorandum (with an additional seventeen pages of attached exhibits) substantively opposing the merits of defendants' summary judgment motion.2 "[A] party's failure to seek discovery under Rule 56(f) before responding to a summary judgment motion is `itself sufficient grounds to reject a claim that the opportunity for discovery was inadequate.'" New York State Teamsters Conference Pension & Ret. Fund v. Express Servs., Inc., 426 F.3d 640, 648 (2d Cir. 2005) (quoting Williams v. R.H. Donnelley Corp., 368 F.3d 123, 126 n.1 (2d Cir. 2004)). Plaintiffs have failed to make the requisite showing that "it cannot present facts essential to justify its opposition." See, Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(f). On the contrary, plaintiffs maintain that "[t]he facts the Court needs to deny [defendants'] motion are

Plaintiffs seek "an order refusing Defendants' application for judgment or granting a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or depositions to be taken or discovery to be had ..." (Pls.' Notice of Rule 56(f) Mot.). Plaintiffs further state that their Rule 56(f) motion is made for "the reasons stated in Part III of Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment[.]" (Pls.' Notice of Rule 56(f) Mot.).
2

1