Local 3621, EMS Officers Union, DC-37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v. City of New York
- Lewis Liman
- 1:18-cv-04476
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Local 3621 v. City of New York, Judge Liman denied discovery of five age-discrimination and retaliation complaints.
The plaintiffs, including Local 3621, EMS Officers Union, DC-37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, Renae Mascol, and Luis Rodriguez, were denied production of the five requested age-discrimination and retaliation complaints. The defendants were not required to produce those five complaints under this ruling.
What happened
In Local 3621 v. City of New York, the plaintiffs asked the court to require production of five complaints alleging age discrimination and retaliation.
The plaintiffs’ claims involve alleged discrimination based on race, sex or gender, and disability. The court had already ordered production of complaints involving those grounds, but the plaintiffs did not show that the five age-related complaints were similar enough to help resolve their claims or that producing them was proportionate to the case.
Judge Lewis J. Liman denied the plaintiffs’ discovery motion. The existing order requiring production of formal complaints based on race, sex or gender, or disability remained in place.
The detailed version
- Local 3621, EMS Officers Union, DC-37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v. City of New York · No. 1:18-cv-04476
- Lewis Liman
- Sept. 24, 2024
Background
The plaintiffs sought to compel production of five Equal Employment Opportunity complaints alleging age discrimination and retaliation. The opinion states that the plaintiffs’ claims allege discrimination based on race, sex or gender, and disability.
Reasoning
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) allows discovery of nonprivileged information that is relevant to a claim or defense and proportionate to the needs of the case. The court concluded that the plaintiffs had not shown that the five complaints were sufficiently similar to their discrimination claims to be relevant or proportional. The court noted that it had already ordered production of complaints based on race, sex or gender, or disability, filed against Roberto Colon and James Booth from 2012 to the present.
The court also rejected the plaintiffs’ reliance on Lieberman v. Gant. According to the opinion, that decision recognized the possible relevance of general patterns of discrimination but did not hold that a pattern involving one protected trait is relevant to an individual claim involving a different protected trait. The court observed that courts regularly limit discovery of discrimination complaints to the types of discrimination alleged by the plaintiff.
Ruling
Judge Lewis J. Liman denied the plaintiffs’ letter motion for discovery, Dkt. No. 611. The order did not broaden the September 19, 2024 discovery order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.