King v. Habib Bank Limited
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:20-cv-04322
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In King v. Habib Bank Limited, Magistrate Judge Wang struck two discovery letters and imposed page limits while directing the parties to meet and confer.
Kevin King and the other plaintiffs, Habib Bank Limited, and their lawyers, because the order struck their filings, required a good-faith meet-and-confer process, and imposed page limits on future discovery-related submissions.
What happened
Kevin King and the other plaintiffs, and Habib Bank Limited, submitted a 73-page joint monthly status letter about discovery disputes. The court noted that the parties had been engaging in lengthy back-and-forth letter writing despite instructions to avoid it.
The court ordered docket entries 270 and 271 stricken. It directed the parties to meet and confer in good faith and allowed them to submit a new joint status letter by July 12, 2024, limited to five single-spaced pages if they could not resolve their disputes.
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang also limited future monthly status letters to five pages and future discovery letter motions to three pages, excluding exhibits. She warned that the court would likely assign costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5) in future motions to compel or for protective orders.
The detailed version
- King v. Habib Bank Limited · No. 1:20-cv-04322
- Lorna Schofield
- July 1, 2024
Background
The court received the parties’ joint monthly status letter at ECF 270. The order states that discovery had become complicated and that the parties continued to submit lengthy exchanges disputing discovery issues. At an earlier status conference, the court had instructed the parties not to engage in prolonged letter-writing campaigns.
The most recent monthly status letter was 73 pages long. The court’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases limited letters to three single-spaced pages, excluding exhibits. The court concluded that further warnings had not stopped the parties’ conduct.
Rulings and Directions
The court ordered ECF Nos. 270 and 271 stricken from the docket. It directed the parties to meet and confer in good faith to resolve their discovery disputes. If they remained unable to agree after that process, they could file a joint status letter by July 12, 2024, limited to five single-spaced pages and fairly describing the remaining disputes.
The court ordered that the next joint monthly status letter, and all future monthly status letters, could not exceed five single-spaced pages. Any future discovery dispute requiring court intervention had to be raised through a letter motion limited to three single-spaced pages, excluding exhibits.
Costs and Rules
The court stated that it would very likely apportion or grant costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5) when deciding future motions to compel or for protective orders. It directed the parties to review Rules 1, 26, and 37, along with the court’s Individual Practices, before bringing future discovery disputes. The order concerns discovery management and does not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.