Discovery in Employment Cases

In Kong v. Morrison-Tennenbaum PLLC, 2019 NY Slip Op 30529(U), 156864/2016 (Sup. Ct. NY Cty. March 1, 2019), an employment discrimination case, the court determined that various “requests to admit” were improper. Judge Chan discussed the parameters of this disclosure device: A notice to admit “is to be used only for disposing of uncontroverted questions…

Read More Court Strikes Requests to Admit in Employment Discrimination Case

In O’Halloran v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 2019 NY Slip Op 01318 (App. Div. 1st Dept. Feb. 21, 2019), an employment discrimination case, the Appellate Division, First Department unanimously affirmed the lower court’s decision granting plaintiff’s motion (pursuant to CPLR 3124) compelling the defendant to provide certain discovery. Citing New York CPLR 3101(a) and relevant case law,…

Read More Order Compelling Discovery in Employment Discrimination Case Affirmed

In Daughtry v. Fedcap Rehabilitation Servs. Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 32857(U), Index No. 152108/2016 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. Nov. 8, 2018) – a race/criminal conviction discrimination case – the court, inter alia, held that plaintiff was not entitled to a deposition of the defendant’s CEO. The court, therefore, granted defendant’s motion for a protective order under…

Read More Deposition of CEO Denied in Criminal Conviction Employment Discrimination Case

In Morales v. PepsiCo. Inc., 16-cv-6597, 2018 WL 3853390 (W.D.N.Y. August 14, 2018), the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against his former employer alleging race discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York State Human Rights Law. Not uncommonly, a discovery dispute arose. Among other issues contested…

Read More Court Addresses Discovery Relating to Emotional Distress Damages in Title VII Discrimination Case

In Hughes v. Twenty–First Century Fox, Inc., 17-cv-7093, 2018 WL 1936096 (S.D.N.Y. April 24, 2018),  a sexual harassment case, the court quashed defendants’ non-party subpoenas. From the decision: This Court need not consider Defendants’ argument that the subpoenaed information will assist them in formulating the defense of absolute truth with respect to Hughes’ defamation claims because…

Read More Court Quashes Non-Party Subpoenas in Sexual Harassment Case [Hughes v. Twenty-First Century Fox]

In Milan v. Sprint Corporation, 2018 WL 1665690 (E.D.N.Y. April 6, 2018), a sexual harassment case, the court affirmed a Magistrate Judge’s Order granting plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery. Plaintiff sought, inter alia, “complaints of sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and/or retaliation against Sprint, including but not limited to complaints through the ‘Sprint’s Ethics Hotline’ and…

Read More Court Compels Discovery of Sexual Harassment Complaints in Lawsuit Against Sprint

In Black v. Buffalo Meat Serv., Inc., No. 15CV49S, 2017 WL 1196469 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2017) – a race/sex hostile work environment and constructive discharge case – the court ruled on the parties’ respective discovery motions. The facts, as summarized by the court: Plaintiff claims that defendants created a hostile work environment on the basis…

Read More Court Declines to Order Production of Plaintiff’s Tax Returns in Race/Sex Hostile Work Environment Case

In Morshed v. St. Barnabas Hosp., No. 16 CIV. 2862 (LGS), 2017 WL 543236 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2017), the court overruled defendants’ claims that ten documents were “privileged under the self-critical analysis privilege, peer review privilege and quality assurance privileges.”[1]Specifically, defendants asserted the following as grounds for their assertion of privilege: Rule 501 of the…

Read More Court Overrules Defendants’ Claims of Privilege in Sexual Harassment/Hostile Work Environment Case

In Ghonda v. Time Warner Cable, Inc., 16-cv-2610, 2017 WL 395111 (EDNY Jan. 27, 2017) – in which plaintiff asserts claims of employment (gender) discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation – the court denied plaintiff’s request to quash a subpoena seeking information relating to plaintiff’s prior employer. From the Order: Plaintiff’s contention that the mere service…

Read More Court Permits “Former Employer” Discovery in Sexual Harassment Case