SKAT v. The Bradley London Pension Plan et al

Filing 207

MEMO ENDORSED ORDER in case 1:18-cv-04047-LAK; denying (856) Motion for Prohibit the Deposition of Nigel Rackham or Exclude His Testimony From Evidence re: (856 in 1:18-md-02865-LAK) MOTION Prohibit the Deposition of Nigel Rackham or Exclud e His Testimony From Evidence . in case 1:18-md-02865-LAK. ENDORSEMENT: This applies to all cases. Certain defendants move to preclude the deposition of Nigel Rackham on the ground that plaintiff proposes to take it after the discovery de adline. Dkt 856. Their argument hinges on the premise that the Rackham deposition was not "pending" as of the close of discovery on December 3, 2021, and that there is no justification for creating an exception for plaintiff's benef it, especially given what movants characterize as plaintiff's lack of due diligence. Movants' interpretation of the word "pending" is not implausible. But it is not the only plausible interpretation. For example, the Oxford Eng lish Dictionary gives, as one definition, this: "While awaiting; until the occurrence or appearance of; until." In that sense, the Rackham deposition remained pending as of December 3, 2021 for the simple reason that it had not yet occurred. Accordingly, the motion is denied. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 8/23/22) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:18-md-02865-LAK et al. (yv)