Chwedczuk v. Horowitz
OPINION re: 22 FIRST LETTER MOTION for Conference addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from William Ricigliano dated June 3, 2016, filed by Albert Chwedczuk. Based on the conclusions set forth above, Plaintiff's motion to schedul e a status conference to schedule depositions is denied, but Plaintiff's motion to extend the deadline to exchange expert reports is granted. The deadline to exchange expert reports is extended to October 7, 2016. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 7/5/2016) (tro)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
14 Civ. 8020
- against OPINION
A P P E A R A N C E S:
Counsel for Plaintiff
WILLIAM RICIGLIANO, P.C.
232 Madison Avenue, Suite 1200
New York, NY 10016
By: William Ricigliano, Esq.
Shanna Bailey, Esq.
Counsel for Defendant
White Plains, NY
By : Christopher
Avenue Suite S-325
Michael Yapchanyk, Esq.
Sweet, D . J. ,
Plaintiff Albert Chwedczuk ("Plaintiff" or " Chwedczuk") has
moved for a status conference to discuss scheduling for certain
depositions of defendant Gregory Horowitz's ("Defendant " or
"Horowitz " ) witnesses and to extend the deadline f or expert
Defendant did not file papers opposing the motion.
The Court does not believe that a status conference will be an
effective method to schedule depositions as discussed below.
However, the deadline to exchange e xpert reports is extended to
October 7, 2016 to allow the parties additional time to schedule
and conduct depositions.
Rule 26 "create[s] many options for the district judge .
[to] manage the discovery process to facilitate prompt and
efficient resolution of the lawsuit."
Crawford-El v . Britton,
523 U.S. 574 , 599, 118 S. Ct. 1584, 1597, 140 L. Ed. 2d 759
It "vests the trial judge with broad discretion to
tailor discovery narrowly and to dictate the sequence of
Id. at 598.
The district court may expand or limit
the permitted number and time limits of depositions, direct "the
time, place, and manner of discovery, or even bar discovery on
certain subjects," and may "set the timing and sequence of
Id. at 598 - 99; Fed . R. Civ. P . 26(b) (2) (A) .
Consequently , the Court has wide discretion in deciding
motions to compel .
See Grand Cent . P ' ship. Inc . v. Cuomo, 166
(2d Cir. 1999) .
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged
matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defenseincluding the existence, description, nature , custody,
condition, and location of any documents or other tangible
things and the identity and location of persons who know of
any discoverable matter .
For good cause , the court may
order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject
matter involved in the action.
Fed . R . Civ. P. 26.
If a party objects to discovery requests,
that party bears the burden of showing why discovery should be
Freydl v. Meringolo, 09 Civ . 07196 (BSJ) (KNF), 2011 WL
2 5 6 6 0 8- 7, at * 3 ( S. D. N. Y . June 16 , 2011) .
The Mo tion to Compel Certain Depositi ons and Extend the
Exper t Discovery Report Deadline i s Granted
Defendant has an obligation to cooperate in scheduling
depositions of witnesses under its control .
Local Civil Rule
26 . 4(a) requires counsel to "cooperate with each other .
all phases of the discovery process."
Plaintiff ' s counsel notes
that she has attempted to contact Defendant's counsel on four
different occasions by email and letter to arrange depositions.
Plaintiff's counsel notes that Defense counsel has not 'responded
to any of these requests to set up dates for depositions.
Defendant's counsel is not cooperating in this case in violation
of the Local Civil Rules.
However, Plaintiff must use the tools available under the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to schedule depositions.
Rule 30(b) (1), Plaintiff can send reasonable notice of the date
and time of a deposition as a Notice of Deposition.
leave of the court, Plaintiff could compel the attendance of
defense witnesses under Rule 30(a) (1) through issuing a subpoena
under Rule 45.
If Defendant still does not comply with these
required procedures, then Plaintiff could move to compel before
Based on the conclusions set forth above, Plaintiff's
motion to schedule a status conference to schedule depositions
is denied, but Plaintiff's motion to extend the deadline to
exchange expert reports is granted.
The deadline to exchange
expert reports is extended to October 7, 2016.
It is so ordered .
New York, NY
July 5..-, 2016
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?