Vann v. Sudranski
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:16-cv-07367
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Vann v. Sudranski, Judge Briccetti denied Vann’s duplicative discovery motion and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
Kouriockein Vann was affected by the denial of his discovery motion and fee-free status for an appeal; Correction Officer Y. Sudranski and Lieutenant S. Hann were the defendants whose discovery response was at issue.
What happened
Vann v. Sudranski concerned Kouriockein Vann’s request for discovery about logbook entries from July 12, 2015. Vann was representing himself and argued that the defendants had not shown a good-faith reason for failing to preserve the entries.
The court said the request repeated issues already resolved and that the entries did not exist. It also noted that Vann’s opposition to the defendants’ summary-judgment motion was still due November 29, 2019.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti denied the discovery motion, directed the clerk to terminate it, and denied fee-free status for an appeal from the order because the court certified that such an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Vann v. Sudranski · No. 7:16-cv-07367
- Vincent Briccetti
- Nov. 12, 2019
Background
Kouriockein Vann, who was representing himself and proceeding without paying filing fees, filed a motion to compel discovery, request an adverse inference, and request relief for spoliation. Spoliation refers to the alleged loss or destruction of evidence. Vann focused on logbook entries for July 12, 2015, and alleged that the defendants had not shown a good-faith reason for failing to preserve them.
Court’s reasoning
The court said it did not need to wait for the defendants’ response because the motion was duplicative and meritless. It explained that the discovery issues had already been considered and resolved. An earlier ruling stated that Vann had received the discovery to which he was entitled and denied his request for additional discovery on that issue. The court also said that, during a July 30, 2019, pre-motion conference, defense counsel told the court and Vann that the requested logbook entries did not exist and had never existed.
Ruling
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti denied the motion to compel discovery and related relief. The court reminded Vann that his opposition to the defendants’ summary-judgment motion remained due November 29, 2019. It certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied fee-free status for an appeal from the order. The clerk was instructed to terminate the motion and mail Vann a copy of the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.