Securities and Exchange Commission v. Genovese
- John Koeltl
- 1:18-cv-00942
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 15
In Securities and Exchange Commission v. Genovese, Judge Moses set pretrial, discovery, response, and remote-hearing procedures without deciding the claims.
The Securities and Exchange Commission, Nicholas J. Genovese, Willow Creek Advisors, LLC, Willow Creek Investments, LP, and their counsel were affected by the deadlines, filing requirements, discovery procedures, remote-proceeding rules, and representation requirements.
What happened
In Securities and Exchange Commission v. Genovese, the case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses for general pretrial management, including scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive motions, and settlement.
The order reminded the parties about deadlines for a joint report and defendants’ responses to the complaint. Nicholas J. Genovese could respond without a lawyer, while Willow Creek Advisors, LLC and Willow Creek Investments, LP had to appear through counsel or face a possible request for a judgment based on their failure to defend.
Judge Moses also established procedures for discovery disputes, deadline extensions, court conferences, remote depositions, and other proceedings during the COVID-19 emergency. The order did not decide the claims’ merits.
The detailed version
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Genovese · No. 1:18-cv-00942
- John Koeltl
- June 18, 2020
Background
The Securities and Exchange Commission sued Nicholas J. Genovese and other defendants. The action had been referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses for general pretrial management under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). The referral covered scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement. Motions to dismiss, motions for judgment on the pleadings, requests for injunctive relief, summary-judgment motions, and class-certification motions remained excluded from the referral described in the order.
Order
The court reminded the parties that their report under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) was due July 24, 2020, and that the defendants’ answers or other responses to the complaint were due October 2, 2020. Genovese could file his answer or other response without a lawyer. Willow Creek Advisors, LLC and Willow Creek Investments, LP were required to appear and defend through counsel. The Commission could seek a default judgment against those entities if they failed to do so.
The order required discovery to be started early enough to finish by the discovery deadline. Discovery applications generally had to comply with the applicable local rule and Judge Moses’s practices, and late discovery applications could be denied as untimely absent extraordinary circumstances. The order also provided procedures for requesting deadline extensions or adjournments and generally limited letters and letter-motions to four pages, excluding attachments.
COVID-19 Procedures
Unless otherwise ordered, conferences and hearings were to occur by telephone during the COVID-19 national emergency. Depositions could be conducted by telephone, videoconference, or other remote means, but the order stated that the requirements for conducting depositions before an authorized officer and placing witnesses under oath still applied. The order explained when a remote deposition would be considered conducted before the officer.
Disposition and Effect
This was a case-management order, not a decision on whether the Commission or the defendants were legally correct. Judge Moses set procedures and deadlines for the litigation and directed that a copy be mailed to Genovese at the address provided in his recent correspondence. The order was dated June 18, 2020.
Read the full 15-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.