Stevens & Company, LLC v. Espat
- Lewis Liman
- 1:24-cv-05223
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Stevens & Company v. Espat, Judge Liman denied a discovery stay, extended deadlines to April 5, 2025, and canceled the March 5 status conference.
The ruling affected Stevens & Company, LLC, Espat, Steven Kamali, and the other parties involved in discovery by requiring discovery to proceed rather than staying depositions, while setting April 5, 2025, as the deposition and overall discovery deadline.
What happened
Stevens & Company, LLC v. Espat involved Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff Espat’s request to pause depositions while the court considered his motion for judgment based on the pleadings and related motions. The parties had exchanged initial documents but had not begun depositions.
The court denied the stay request because the parties had not shown a sufficient reason to pause discovery at that stage. The court also extended the deadline for completing depositions to April 5, 2025; the deadline for completing all discovery remained April 5, 2025.
Judge Lewis J. Liman canceled the status conference scheduled for March 5, 2025. The order did not decide the pending motions concerning the parties’ claims.
The detailed version
- Stevens & Company, LLC v. Espat · No. 1:24-cv-05223
- Lewis Liman
- Feb. 14, 2025
Background
Counsel for Espat, identified as both Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, asked the court to partially stay discovery while the court considered Espat’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, filed February 4, 2025. A judgment-on-the-pleadings motion asks the court to decide claims based on the pleadings already filed. The request focused specifically on staying depositions. The letter also referred to Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint.
The parties had exchanged initial document productions and were working through remaining discovery disputes, but depositions had not begun. Counsel stated that the pending motions could resolve many of the liability claims, including claims by Plaintiff against Defendant, Espat’s counterclaims, and third-party claims against Steven Kamali. Opposing counsel agreed to the requested stay if it also covered the resolution of Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint.
Court’s Ruling
Judge Lewis J. Liman denied the motion for a stay. The court stated that the parties had not shown good cause to stay discovery at that stage of the case. The order did not rule on the merits of Espat’s motion for judgment on the pleadings or Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss.
The court extended the deadline for completing depositions to April 5, 2025. The deadline for completing all discovery remained April 5, 2025. The court also canceled the status conference scheduled for March 5, 2025.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.