Rusfeldt v. City of New York, New York

Document and procedural setting

The provided text is a January 28, 2025 pre-motion letter from Josh Dixon, identified as the Center for American Liberty’s Director of Litigation, on behalf of Pastor Aden Rusfeldt. It asks the court to adjourn, meaning postpone, the pretrial conference and related deadlines and to allow the parties to begin “Stage 2” discovery. The text does not contain a court order or a ruling on that request.

Underlying case and staged discovery

The letter states that Rusfeldt alleges the City of New York and NYPD Assistant Chief Stephen Hughes violated his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It says his claims involve law-enforcement action allegedly taken against him in a situation where a hostile crowd sought to silence his speech, described in the letter as a “heckler’s veto.” Rusfeldt also alleged that the City had constitutionally deficient policies governing First Amendment activity.

According to the letter, the parties agreed to conduct discovery in stages, and the court entered a staged-discovery order on December 7, 2022. Stage 1 was limited to non-municipal-liability issues, including whether any defendant violated Rusfeldt’s constitutional rights. Discovery into alleged City policies, practices, procedures, and customs was reserved for Stage 2. The letter emphasizes that the order staged discovery but did not separate the case for all purposes.

Prior summary-judgment rulings reported in the letter

The letter says the parties completed Stage 1 discovery and filed cross-motions for summary judgment on whether the defendants violated Rusfeldt’s constitutional rights. It reports that the court denied Rusfeldt’s motion and partially granted and partially denied the defendants’ motion. The letter says the court found a genuine dispute of material fact concerning possible violations of Rusfeldt’s First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. These are descriptions of earlier rulings in the letter, not rulings made by the provided document.

Requested relief

The letter says the court had directed the parties to submit pretrial materials, scheduled a pretrial conference for April 15, 2025, and continued the stay on Stage 2 discovery. Rusfeldt’s counsel argues that proceeding to trial before Stage 2 discovery would be premature and prejudicial because Rusfeldt had not obtained the NYPD policies or municipal testimony concerning those policies. The letter requests postponement of all pretrial deadlines, postponement of the conference, and authorization to begin Stage 2 discovery. It states that defense counsel did not consent to the request.

Disposition

The provided text does not state that Judge Castel granted, denied, or otherwise resolved the requested postponement or discovery relief. It therefore supplies no disposition for the motion described in the letter.