Artis v. Phelps Hospital Association

Background

Vincent Artis, representing himself, filed a motion to extend discovery. He requested phone records, text messages, emails, correspondence, and social-media information involving Assistant Director Tony, Director Mario, Supervisor Diego, and Jeff Meat.

Artis argued that the requested information could support his retaliation and discrimination claims. He asserted that Tony and Diego had acknowledged that he did good work, while Phelps had said his work was not good. He also stated that he remained on probation after completing an extended probation period, and that he had asked Director Mario and Jeff Meat about the issue without receiving an answer. Artis characterized these circumstances as evidence that the four individuals had acted together against him. He further stated that the EEOC had raised a discrimination claim, that Northwell had admitted to it, and that Assistant Director Tony and Director Mario had been fired.

Artis cited authorities concerning the possible relevance of employee records and requested a hearing. He also said he was not a lawyer and did not know he could seek this type of discovery until the defendants’ lawyer requested discovery from him.

Court’s Action

The court did not grant or deny the motion in this order. Instead, Judge Andrew E. Krause stated that the court would address the motion and any discovery disputes raised in the parties’ discovery-dispute letters at an in-person status conference scheduled for December 22, 2025. The parties were directed to file those letters by December 10, 2025, and the defendants were permitted to respond to Artis’s motion in their December 10 letter. The clerk was directed to mail Artis a copy of the endorsed order.

Effect

The opinion leaves Artis’s discovery request unresolved pending the scheduled conference. It does not state whether the requested records will ultimately be produced.