Factory Mutual Insurance Company v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York
Factory Mutual Insurance Company v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
- Subramanian
- 1:24-cv-08133
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Factory Mutual v. Consolidated Edison, Judge Subramanian denied plaintiffs’ request to court-sign subpoenas for two New York City agencies.
The plaintiffs and the New York City Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Transportation are affected by the ruling concerning the subpoenas.
What happened
Factory Mutual Insurance Company and other plaintiffs asked the court to approve and sign two subpoenas directed to the New York City Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Transportation.
The court explained that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow plaintiffs’ lawyers to issue and sign these subpoenas, with no stated exception for public agencies. The court also said the plaintiffs could ask the court to require compliance if the agencies refused to respond, and the agencies could ask the court to cancel the subpoenas.
Judge Arun Subramanian denied the plaintiffs’ request to have the court approve and sign the subpoenas.
The detailed version
- Factory Mutual Insurance Company v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York · No. 1:24-cv-08133
- Subramanian
- Feb. 25, 2025
Background
The plaintiffs asked the court to approve and sign two subpoenas directed to the New York City Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Transportation. The plaintiffs said the agencies had informed them that subpoenas had to be approved and signed by the court.
Court’s Analysis
The court found persuasive the reasoning in Anderson v. City of New York. That decision concluded that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorize a plaintiff’s lawyer to issue and sign subpoenas of this type. The court stated that the rules contain no exception for subpoenas served on public agencies and declined to create such an exception.
The court also explained that if either city agency refused to respond, the plaintiffs could ask the court to require compliance. Alternatively, an agency could ask the court to cancel the subpoena.
Ruling
Judge Arun Subramanian denied the plaintiffs’ request for the court to approve and sign the two subpoenas.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.