Harmon et al v. Mosley et al
Filing
169
ORDER granting 168 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File Application granted. The motion for leave to amend is due by January 30, 2025. Any oppositions to that motion are due by February 13, 2025. Plaintiffs reply in further support of the motion is due by February 21, 2025. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate ECF 168. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky on 1/27/2025) (jca)
VERNER SIMON
30 WALL STREET, 8TH FLOOR ? NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005 ? (212) 502 5500 / (856) 267-1953 FAX
pwverner@vernerlaw.com
___________________
VIA ECF
The Honorable Robyn F. Tarnofsky
United States Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007
Application granted. The motion for leave to amend is due
by January 30, 2025. Any oppositions to that motion are
due by February 13, 2025. Plaintiffs’ reply in further support
of the motion is due by February 21, 2025. The Clerk of
Court is respectfully requested to terminate ECF 168.
Date: 1/27/2025
New York, NY
Re: Harmon v. Mosley, et al.
Case No. 1:23-cv-04225
Dear Judge Tarnofsky:
This letter serves as Plaintiffs’ reply to Defendants’ January 24 th letter (ECF#167)
regarding expert depositions. Additionally, it seeks to enlarge the briefing schedule for Plaintiffs’
Motion to For Leave to Amend the Complaint which Plaintiffs addressed at the discovery
conference on Friday. I address these purposes in reverse Order.
On Friday evening close to 11:25 p.m. ET, Defendants served their expert Notice and
Report of John Edwin Kelly, etc. although Plaintiffs had requested it be delivered before close of
business.
On Saturday morning, Defendants’ counsel initiated telephone discussions about resolving
the litigation based upon their expert’s report. Discussions by email followed concerning the
Plaintiffs’ intended Motion and the deposition of Mr. Mosley also set for tomorrow, Monday. The
parties could not agree on a settlement over the weekend and the timing of the Motion and Mosley
deposition were not altered by agreement on Saturday.
By Sunday, Plaintiffs’ counsel were able to confer more fully with their client. Although
I was the attorney who suggested at the Friday discovery conference that the Plaintiffs’ Motion
could be filed by Monday evening, it has proven unworkable to have multiple discussions about
settlement with opposing counsel and the clients/co-counsel over the weekend and to also prepare
both a motion and a major party deposition. The discussions concerning resolution were initiated
by Defendants, foreseeably consumed a significant amount of our time over the weekend, and now
Plaintiffs Motion will require another 72 hours to file in good Order. Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek
the Court’s leave and request an adjustment of the briefing schedule for all parties by three days
to accommodate all the parties’ briefs.1 However, Plaintiffs intend to proceed forward with the
deposition of Mr. Mosley on Monday, January 27 th .
1
1/30/2025 Brief, 2/13/2025 Responses and 2/21/2025 Replies.
VERNER SIMON
Hon. Robyn F. Tarnofsky
January 26, 2025
___________________
Page 2
Plaintiffs note that the request for the enlargement of briefing will not change the
Defendants’ position in the action in any manner. Further, the Motion will still be pending before
the parties appear for the Settlement Conference on February 7th. Finally, by focusing on the
Mosley deposition and spending the next 72 hours continuing the dialogue initiated by Defendants’
counsel on Saturday, perhaps the parties have a better chance of resolving the case with finality.
The Mosley Defendants were asked to consent to the enlargement of the briefing schedule
(among other things) and characteristically refused. We did not yet hear back from counsel for
Hipgnosis.
In response to Mr. Davis’s letter concerning expert deposition dates and methods, we
advise the Court and him that we will agree to take the deposition of their Defendants’ expert, Mr.
Kelly on February 5th , with Plaintiffs’ expert, Mr. Moughan on February 6th (on UK time) and
Plaintiffs consent to take all experts’ depositions by remote means.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
VERNER SIMON
s/ Paul W. Verner
Paul W. Verner
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?