Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 31, 2020

Sakellarides v. The Colored Girl, LLC

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:20-cv-04708
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sakellarides v. The Colored Girl, LLC, Judge Schofield ordered further licensing-fee production and closed a discovery motion.

Who this affects

The plaintiff and The Colored Girl(s), LLC, concerning production of licensing-fee records in discovery.

What happened

Sakellarides v. The Colored Girl, LLC concerns a dispute over documents showing licensing fees received for a photograph or similar photographs. The plaintiff opposed the defendant’s request to compel discovery, arguing that invoices already produced satisfied the court’s earlier order.

The plaintiff said the invoices included terms governing photograph use and argued that no additional documents in the plaintiff’s possession could be compelled. The opinion also notes that the plaintiff was ordered to produce any further responsive documents by September 7, 2020.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered the plaintiff to produce any further records reflecting licensing fees by that date. If none were produced, the court stated that this would be treated as an admission that no such fees were earned, and directed the clerk to close the motion at Docket 23.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Sakellarides v. The Colored Girl, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-04708
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Aug. 31, 2020

Background

The plaintiff opposed the defendant’s motion to compel discovery. The dispute concerned an August 12, 2020 order requiring production of records showing licensing fees received for the photograph at issue or similar photographs.

Parties’ positions

The plaintiff argued that the plaintiff had complied with the August 12 order by producing relevant invoices on August 25, 2020. The plaintiff maintained that the invoices constituted licensing records because they included written terms governing the scope and use of the license. The plaintiff also argued that the court could not compel production of documents not in the plaintiff’s possession.

The plaintiff separately argued that the discovery motion should be denied because defense counsel had not first contacted plaintiff’s counsel by telephone as required by the court’s individual rules and procedures.

Order

The court ordered that, by September 7, 2020, the plaintiff produce any further documents reflecting licensing fees received for the photograph or similar photographs. The court stated that, if no such documents were produced, that would be treated as an admission that no such fees were earned. The court also directed the clerk to close the open motion at Docket 23.

The order does not expressly state that the motion to compel was granted or denied. The supplied case name uses “The Colored Girl, LLC,” while the opinion text refers in places to “The Colored Girls, LLC.”

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.