Delgado v. Donald J. Trump For President, Inc.
- Analisa Torres
- 1:19-cv-11764
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Delgado v. Donald J. Trump For President, Inc., Judge Parker denied reconsideration, leaving Delgado’s permission to depose Michael Glassner before summary judgment unchanged.
The ruling allowed Arlene Delgado to pursue a deposition of Michael Glassner for use in opposing the defendants’ summary-judgment motion and seeking summary judgment herself; it denied the defendants’ request to undo that permission.
What happened
In Delgado v. Donald J. Trump For President, Inc., the defendants asked the court to reconsider its earlier decision allowing Arlene Delgado to question Michael Glassner under a rule that permits needed discovery before a summary-judgment decision. Delgado opposed the request and separately asked the court to strike the defendants’ reply.
The court considered the defendants’ arguments as if they had originally opposed Delgado’s discovery request. It concluded that Delgado’s request was proper because it sought to challenge statements in Glassner’s declaration, which the defendants submitted in support of summary judgment, including a statement about when Delgado disclosed Jason Miller’s appointment. The court said Delgado had explained what information she sought and why she previously had been unable to obtain it.
Judge Katharine H. Parker denied the defendants’ motion for reconsideration. The court also denied Delgado’s motion to strike as moot and directed the clerk to terminate both motions.
The detailed version
- Delgado v. Donald J. Trump For President, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-11764
- Analisa Torres
- Oct. 8, 2024
Background
On September 30, 2024, the court granted Arlene Delgado’s request to depose Michael Glassner under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). That rule allows a court to delay or deny consideration of a summary-judgment motion, allow additional discovery, or issue another appropriate order when a party shows by affidavit or declaration that it cannot yet present facts needed to oppose summary judgment.
The defendants filed a motion for reconsideration on October 1, 2024. Delgado opposed it. The defendants filed a reply, and Delgado filed a letter styled as a motion to strike that reply.
Court’s analysis
The court acknowledged that the defendants were understandably confused about the time allowed to respond to Delgado’s Rule 56(d) request and that the court should have requested their response before ruling. Although the defendants called their filing a motion for reconsideration, the court considered their arguments as if they had initially been made in opposition to Delgado’s request.
The court concluded that the Rule 56(d) request was properly granted. Delgado sought to depose Glassner about assertions in his declaration supporting the defendants’ summary-judgment motion, including his statement that Delgado disclosed Jason Miller’s appointment as White House Communications Director before the information became public. The court found that Delgado explained what facts she sought, how those facts related to her retaliation claim, why they were important to opposing summary judgment and pursuing her own summary-judgment motion, and why her earlier efforts to depose Glassner had been unsuccessful.
The court distinguished cases cited by the defendants because those cases did not involve a request for discovery specifically directed at a declaration filed by the party seeking summary judgment. The court also noted that Delgado’s request had a new justification: responding to Glassner’s declaration, which she could not have addressed before the defendants filed it. The court recognized that Delgado had not previously been diligent in trying to depose Glassner, but found that this did not defeat her new Rule 56(d) request.
Disposition
The court denied the defendants’ motion for reconsideration. It also denied Delgado’s motion to strike the defendants’ reply as moot. The clerk was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 453 and 457. The opinion did not decide the underlying retaliation claim or the parties’ summary-judgment motions.
Judge
The order was signed by Katharine H. Parker, United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.