Ramirez v. City Of New York

Background

Sally Ramirez sued the City of New York and S. Devi Jewram, alleging discrimination and retaliation based on race, color, national origin, and age. The opinion text describes Ramirez as a City Human Resources Administration finance director and alleges that a younger candidate, Darshan Taylor, received an Assistant Deputy Commissioner position for which Ramirez was qualified. The merits of those allegations are not decided in the supplied text.

Discovery dispute

Ramirez asked the court to compel the defendants to search City-issued and personal cellphones used for City business. The requested custodians were Ramirez, S. Devi Jewram, Darshan Taylor, and Tabitha Brown. Ramirez sought searches for relevant text messages, including deleted messages, using forensic imaging or reliable software. She also requested a hit report showing the search results and a report identifying the dates of any deleted texts.

Ramirez’s counsel asserted that cellphone searches had been discussed during the parties’ electronic-information negotiations and that the defendants had agreed to search relevant devices. Defense counsel disputed that the parties had previously agreed to a cellphone search and argued that conducting one would be disproportionate to the needs of the case. The parties’ lawyers conferred but did not resolve the dispute.

Court’s action

The supplied order states that the defendants should respond on January 24, 2025, at 12:00 p.m., and is signed by Judge Arun Subramanian. It does not state that the court granted or denied the request to compel cellphone searches. It also does not resolve the parties’ underlying employment-discrimination claims. This is therefore a discovery-related procedural order rather than a ruling on the merits.