Accettola v. He

Background

Hong Danielle Accettola alleges that she was employed by WL Global Corp. as president beginning in 2013. She alleges that Linda Mei He owned, managed, or served as chief executive of WL Global, Wailian Overseas Consulting Group Ltd., and We Education Group Inc. Accettola claims that she questioned transactions involving Paycheck Protection Program loans and other company transactions, was then excluded from work duties, and was terminated on November 5, 2021. She also alleges that her personal information continued to be used and that she remained associated with certain company bank and payroll accounts.

Accettola asserts claims under New York Labor Law § 740 for retaliation, as well as claims for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The defendants asserted counterclaims against her for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, faithless servant, unjust enrichment, and conversion.

Discovery dispute

The court’s January 22, 2024 scheduling order required depositions to be completed by May 15, 2024, and fact discovery to be completed by June 17, 2024. After Accettola’s counsel said she could not attend a deposition scheduled for May 15 because she was out of the country, the parties scheduled her deposition for June 14. The defendants’ counsel and a court reporter appeared on June 14, but Accettola did not. An assistant to Accettola’s counsel notified the defendants about three minutes before the scheduled start that neither Accettola nor her counsel would appear. The opinion states that Accettola later attributed the absence to an order in another court, but that she did not have a copy of that order and had not seen it.

The defendants sought to strike Accettola’s pleadings, enter judgment in their favor, and require Accettola and her counsel to pay fees and costs. They also sought sanctions based on Accettola’s responses to requests for admission. Accettola requested a stay of discovery based on issues involving the other court’s order.

Rulings

The court held that striking the pleadings or entering judgment would be too severe at this stage. It ordered sanctions consisting of the attorneys’ fees and costs the defendants incurred in preparing for and attending the canceled deposition and in preparing the sanctions motion. It also ordered Accettola to make herself available for a deposition by August 1, 2024, on a date selected by the defendants. The court warned that failing to appear and answer questions could lead to additional sanctions, including striking her pleadings or entering judgment for the defendants.

The court denied without prejudice the defendants’ request for sanctions based on the requests for admission. It explained that the motion was premature under the rule the defendants cited. The defendants could renew that motion later if the rule’s requirements were met, or could file a different motion challenging the sufficiency of Accettola’s answers or objections and identifying the specific requests at issue.

The court denied Accettola’s request to stay discovery because she had not provided reasons establishing that a stay was needed, and no party had intervened to request one.

Disposition

The motion for sanctions was granted in part and denied in part. The defendants were directed to submit their fee-and-cost application by September 1, 2024. Accettola could file an opposition limited to the amount of the fees by September 15, 2024, and would be required to pay the approved amount within 30 days after the court approved the final award. Judge Lewis J. Liman directed the clerk to close the sanctions motion.