In Lindsey v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc., No. 23-CV-10166 (ALC)(SN), 2026 WL 63219 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 8, 2026), in which plaintiff alleges claims of hostile work environment, gender discrimination, sexual assault, and retaliation, the court ruled on defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to produce documents in response to various discovery requests.
One issue addressed by the court concerned the discovery of documents concerning the disclosure of any romantic relationships plaintiff has had with other former or current employees of defendant. As to this request, the court explained:
Plaintiff argues that such evidence would be inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 412. A key issue in this case is why Plaintiff did not report Singh’s alleged misconduct prior to November 2022. The Bank’s Employee Handbook discusses intimate relationships and prohibits managers from dating or having any intimate relationship “with any individual in their direct, indirect or matrix reporting chain.” ECF No. 72-1 at 3. If such an impermissible relationship were to occur, the employee is “expected to inform Human Resources so that any potential, actual or perceived conflict of interest can be addressed.”
Rule 412, generally, prohibits the admission of evidence of prior sexual behavior or sexual predisposition in cases involving alleged sexual misconduct. Although Rule 412 concerns questions of admissibility that are premature at this stage, the probative value of permitting such discovery is heavily outweighed by the intrusive nature of the Bank’s request and the potential chilling effect it could have on others bringing forward sexual harassment claims. Moreover, there is minimal value in permitting the Bank to inquire about whether Plaintiff disclosed any other potential relationships, as the Bank should already have that information in their possession per their disclosure policy.
The court thus concluded that, except for responsive documents plaintiff already agreed to produce, it would deny defendant’s request “to compel plaintiff to produce documents concerning whether plaintiff engaged in any other potential romantic relationships with other Bank employees and, if so, whether she reported them as required by the Bank’s policy.”