Alston v. Mutual Housing Association of New York Management, Inc.

Background

The defendants asked the court to resolve two discovery disputes. First, they sought an order compelling Alston to produce her 2020 and 2021 tax returns, or at least the portions showing income, because they said her post-termination income was relevant to calculating her claimed economic damages. They also sought documents showing Alston’s efforts to reduce her losses by seeking work or otherwise obtaining income during the period from approximately May 2020 through July 2021.

Second, the defendants requested an extension of fact discovery so they could review medical records and text messages that Alston produced shortly before the discovery deadline. The defendants stated that Alston produced more than 200 pages of documents during the week before the deadline, including text messages that had not previously been produced.

The Parties’ Positions

The defendants argued that Alston’s tax returns were relevant and that the information could not be obtained from less intrusive sources. They pointed to differences between Alston’s deposition testimony, resume, and LinkedIn profile concerning work during the disputed period. They also argued that they needed time to review the late-produced documents.

Alston opposed both requests. She argued that she had already provided documents sufficient to show her income, including tax forms in her possession, and that the defendants had known about the disputes for months. She also argued that mitigation documents would concern damages rather than liability. Alternatively, she asked for any extension to be limited to two weeks and to the production of mitigation documents.

Ruling

Judge Torres ordered that the defendants’ request to compel Alston to produce documents showing mitigation efforts and income during the disputed period was GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The request to compel the 2020 and 2021 tax returns was denied as moot to the extent Alston understood “the relevant time period” to include the disputed period. Alston’s counsel was ordered to confirm or deny that understanding to defense counsel on March 18, 2025.

The request to compel documents concerning mitigation efforts was granted. The order required Alston to timely produce any outstanding documents responsive to that request. The defendants’ request for an extension of fact discovery was granted, and fact discovery was set to close on March 31, 2025. The court also adjourned the April 7, 2025 case-management conference to April 21, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 36.