Kohli v. Independent Recovery Resources, Inc., CV 17-3154 (JFB) (ARL). (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. New York
Number: infdco20190207d61
Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER ARLENE ROSARIO LINDSAY , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is the plaintiff's motion brought by order to show cause seeking sanctions for the defendants' alleged willful failure to comply with their discovery obligations. Even though plaintiff's counsel has filed two copies of an eight-page memorandum as well as an affidavit attaching letters between counsel, the Court is hard pressed to determine exactly what discovery the plaintiff believes is outstanding. Indeed, the memorandum p
Summary: ORDER ARLENE ROSARIO LINDSAY , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is the plaintiff's motion brought by order to show cause seeking sanctions for the defendants' alleged willful failure to comply with their discovery obligations. Even though plaintiff's counsel has filed two copies of an eight-page memorandum as well as an affidavit attaching letters between counsel, the Court is hard pressed to determine exactly what discovery the plaintiff believes is outstanding. Indeed, the memorandum pr..
More
ORDER
ARLENE ROSARIO LINDSAY, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is the plaintiff's motion brought by order to show cause seeking sanctions for the defendants' alleged willful failure to comply with their discovery obligations. Even though plaintiff's counsel has filed two copies of an eight-page memorandum as well as an affidavit attaching letters between counsel, the Court is hard pressed to determine exactly what discovery the plaintiff believes is outstanding. Indeed, the memorandum primarily addresses the plaintiff's concern that the defendant Reproductive Specialists of New York may be left without assets to satisfy a potential judgment following its purchase by New York University Winthrop Hospital. Accordingly, the motion is denied with leave to renew in accordance with the rules governing the procedure for raising discovery issues. The plaintiff may file a letter application pursuant to Local Rule 37.3 outlining what, if any, discovery is outstanding and setting forth her arguments with respect to her entitlement to that discovery. The plaintiff is reminded that copies of the relevant requests and the defendants' responses must be annexed to her letter application. Counsel for the plaintiff is also reminded that reply letters are not permitted to be filed on discovery applications absent leave of the Court.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
