Norris v. Christopher Bleeker Owner LLC

Background

Christopher Bleeker Owner LLC moved to stay, or pause, discovery while its motion to dismiss the amended complaint was pending. The motion to dismiss argued, among other things, that Plaintiff lacked standing and that the action was moot. The case concerns physical accessibility under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that a motion to dismiss does not automatically stay discovery. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1), a court may stay discovery for good cause. Courts assess good cause by considering: (1) whether the defendant has made a strong showing that the claim is unmeritorious; (2) the scope and burden of discovery; and (3) the risk of unfair prejudice to the party opposing the stay.

The court found good cause. It did not decide the merits of the motion to dismiss, but recognized that the defendants had raised substantial arguments that the court lacked jurisdiction. Discovery could also be expensive because the accessibility claims would likely require architectural expert witnesses, and that expense could be wasted if the action were dismissed as moot. Finally, the case was still in its early stages, and Plaintiff had not opposed the stay.

Disposition

Judge Jeannette A. Vargas granted Defendant’s Motion to Stay Discovery. All deadlines in the Case Management Plan were stayed, and the clerk was directed to terminate the motion, listed as ECF No. 61.