Kravitz v. State of New York
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:16-cv-08999
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Kravitz v. State of New York, Judge Karas granted Kravitz leave to depose incarcerated witness Bakhosheq Allan about alleged interruptions during religious services.
Plaintiff Jay S. Kravitz may take the deposition of incarcerated witness Bakhosheq Allan, with coordination involving the parties and Attica Correctional Facility. The order concerns discovery in Kravitz’s claims against Defendants.
What happened
Kravitz v. State of New York concerns Plaintiff Jay S. Kravitz’s request to question incarcerated witness Bakhosheq Allan before trial. Kravitz said Allan witnessed events during 2014 Shavout services at Downstate Facility and had information relevant to Kravitz’s claims that Defendants violated his First Amendment rights.
Kravitz asked to take Allan’s deposition because Allan was incarcerated at Attica Correctional Facility and had a projected earliest release date of March 2, 2028. Kravitz’s attorneys said the testimony was material, not otherwise available to Kravitz, and could be obtained without unreasonably disrupting prison operations. Defendants did not object to the deposition as inconsistent with the discovery rules.
Judge Kenneth M. Karas granted the request and ordered that Kravitz may depose Allan. The order did not otherwise decide the underlying claims concerning the 2014 religious services.
The detailed version
- Kravitz v. State of New York · No. 7:16-cv-08999
- Kenneth Karas
- Jan. 17, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Jay S. Kravitz asked the court for permission to take the oral deposition of incarcerated witness Bakhosheq Allan. The request was made under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2)(B), which requires court permission to depose a person confined in prison. The letter also cited the court’s local discovery rule.
Kravitz identified Allan as the inmate who served as the Jewish Cadre at Downstate Facility during the Shavout services in 2014, when the events alleged in the complaint occurred. Kravitz said Allan’s knowledge and testimony were material to claims that Defendants infringed Kravitz’s First Amendment rights. The proposed testimony concerned Defendants’ conduct during the June 4 Shavout observances, including whether they interrupted prayers.
Arguments and discovery standard
Kravitz’s attorneys asserted that Allan had witnessed the alleged events and possessed material information not otherwise available to Kravitz. They also stated that Allan was incarcerated at Attica Correctional Facility and had a projected earliest release date of March 2, 2028. Because that date was more than three years away, counsel argued that taking the deposition in prison was necessary to preserve Allan’s testimony before fact discovery ended.
The letter stated that the deposition was consistent with the limits on discovery because it was not cumulative or duplicative, was not readily obtainable from a more convenient source, and was within the permitted scope of discovery. Counsel also said they had discussed the potential deposition with Attica staff, who would assist with coordination, scheduling, and logistics. Defendants did not object to the deposition as inconsistent with the discovery limits.
Ruling
The court’s order states: “Granted. So Ordered.” Judge Kenneth M. Karas therefore granted Kravitz leave to depose Allan. The order addressed permission to conduct discovery; it did not decide whether Defendants violated Kravitz’s First Amendment rights or otherwise resolve the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.