Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 15, 2025

Buffington v. sPay, Inc.

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:24-cv-02541
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
DiscoveryArbitrationCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Buffington v. SPAY, Inc., Judge Halpern denied plaintiffs’ discovery request and defendant’s sanctions request, and ordered arbitration tried to a jury.

Who this affects

The order affects the plaintiffs, SPAY, Inc. d/b/a STACK SPORTS, and the handling of the arbitration issue in the case.

What happened

In Buffington v. SPAY, Inc., the plaintiffs asked the court to require SPAY, Inc. to produce documents that were outside the scope of the arbitration issue.

The court denied that discovery request and also denied SPAY’s request for sanctions. The court ruled that a jury will decide the arbitration issue and directed the Clerk of Court to close the pending discovery letter-motion.

Judge Philip M. Halpern issued the order on May 15, 2025.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Buffington v. sPay, Inc. · No. 7:24-cv-02541
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
May 15, 2025

Rulings

The court ruled on a discovery dispute in the case. The plaintiffs’ May 13, 2025 letter asked the court to direct SPAY, Inc. to produce documents outside the scope of the arbitration issue. The court denied that request.

To the extent SPAY sought sanctions, the court denied that request as well.

The court also ruled that the arbitration issue will be tried to a jury. The order did not decide whether arbitration is ultimately required. The Clerk of Court was respectfully requested to terminate the pending letter-motion, identified as Document 45.

Effect of the Order

The order resolves the identified discovery dispute and sanctions request while providing that a jury will decide the arbitration issue. Judge Philip M. Halpern signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.