Brenner v. City Of New York
- Jesse Furman
- 1:24-cv-06949
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Jessica Brenner v. City of New York, Judge Furman granted the City’s request to pause the case for six weeks.
Jessica Brenner, the City of New York, and co-defendant Correction Officer Anthony Martin were affected by the six-week pause, the changed pretrial-conference date, and the required investigation-status update.
What happened
In Jessica Brenner v. City of New York, Jessica Brenner alleges that Correction Officer Anthony Martin sexually assaulted her while she was incarcerated on Rikers Island. The City asked the court to pause the lawsuit while two investigations continued.
The City said it could not produce documents from the investigations because of confidentiality protections and argued that continuing discovery could interfere with the investigations. Brenner agreed to a six-week pause but wanted the opportunity to oppose any longer pause.
Judge Furman granted the City’s request for a six-week pause on consent. He required the City to update the court by September 19, 2025, adjourned the September 18 pretrial conference to October 30, 2025, and directed the Clerk to terminate ECF No. 58.
The detailed version
- Brenner v. City Of New York · No. 1:24-cv-06949
- Jesse Furman
- Aug. 6, 2025
Background
Jessica Brenner alleges that Correction Officer Anthony Martin sexually assaulted her on June 20, 2023, while she was incarcerated on Rikers Island. The City of New York asked the court to pause the civil case while investigations by the New York City Department of Investigation and the Department of Correction continued. The Department of Correction’s investigation under the Prison Rape Elimination Act was on hold because of the Department of Investigation’s investigation.
The City stated that it had produced more than 1,000 pages of documents but had withheld investigative materials. It relied on the law-enforcement privilege, which protects certain information connected to ongoing investigations, and the deliberative-process privilege, which can protect certain materials prepared during government decision-making. The City argued that continuing discovery while the investigations remained open could duplicate investigative work, interfere with witness interviews or depositions, and risk disclosure of protected information.
Brenner consented to a stay—a temporary pause in the case—for six weeks only. Counsel for Martin consented to the City’s request. The City sought a stay until both investigations concluded and asked for permission to submit a revised case-management plan after the stay ended.
Ruling
Judge Jesse M. Furman granted the City of New York’s request to stay the case for six weeks on consent. The order did not decide the underlying allegations or the parties’ arguments about discovery privileges.
The court required the City to file a letter by September 19, 2025, updating the court on the investigations and any renewed request for a stay. If the request were renewed, the court would give the other parties an opportunity to oppose it. Because of the temporary stay, the court adjourned the pretrial conference from September 18, 2025, to October 30, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF No. 58.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.