Kiss v. Kenny
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:22-cv-10663
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Kiss v. Kenny, Judge McCarthy denied a remote-deposition request and sanctions request, requiring Kiss to attend in person.
Daniel Kiss must attend his deposition in person; Janet Kenny did not receive the requested monetary sanctions.
What happened
In Kiss v. Kenny, Daniel Kiss, who is representing himself, asked to give his deposition by videoconference because of depression and generalized anxiety disorder. Janet Kenny opposed the request and sought reimbursement for a possible cancellation fee.
The court found that Kiss’s medical records confirmed his generalized anxiety disorder but did not explain why an in-person deposition would harm him or why a remote deposition was necessary. It also found that Kiss was the key witness for his claims and that his credibility was important, so the defendants’ concerns about an in-person deposition outweighed his stated hardship.
Judge McCarthy denied both requests. Kiss must attend his deposition in person on a date convenient for all parties, and Kenny’s request for monetary sanctions was denied because no actual cancellation cost was shown and the court found no excessive effort by Kiss to prevent the deposition.
The detailed version
- Kiss v. Kenny · No. 7:22-cv-10663
- Cathy Seibel
- May 29, 2025
Background
Daniel Kiss, proceeding without a lawyer, asked the court to require that defendants take his deposition by videoconference because of depression and generalized anxiety disorder. Janet Kenny opposed the request, questioned the timing and support for the application, and asked for monetary sanctions related to the canceled deposition. The court initially denied Kiss’s request without prejudice and allowed him to provide medical evidence if he wanted the court to reconsider. Kiss then submitted medical-record excerpts and a letter from the Social Security Administration concerning his disability status. Kenny opposed the request again and renewed her request for sanctions.
Remote Deposition
The court explained that it has broad authority to manage discovery, including deciding where and how a deposition will occur. A request for a remote deposition must contain more than a conclusory statement and requires the court to weigh the claimed hardship against possible prejudice to the opposing party.
The court found that Kiss’s records supported his claim that he had generalized anxiety disorder, but they did not state that he needed a remote deposition or explain what harm he would suffer from appearing in person. The court also found that Kiss was the key and only witness able to support his conversion claims and the alleged value of the items involved. Because his credibility was critically important, the court concluded that the defendants’ claimed prejudice outweighed Kiss’s claimed hardship.
The court denied Kiss’s request for a remote deposition and directed him to attend his deposition in person on a date convenient to all parties.
Request for Sanctions
Kenny sought reimbursement for a possible court-reporting-company cancellation fee. The court noted that Kenny did not state that the reporting company actually charged a fee. It also found no indication that Kiss had excessively tried to thwart the deposition process or that Kenny incurred actual costs from the cancellation. The court therefore concluded that monetary sanctions were not warranted and denied Kenny’s request for sanctions.
Disposition
Judge McCarthy denied both parties’ applications. Kiss’s request for a remote deposition was denied, and Kenny’s request for monetary sanctions was denied. The order also directed that a copy be mailed to Kiss.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.