Delgado v. City of New York
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:19-cv-06320
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Delgado v. City of New York, Judge Engelmayer stayed discovery while defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings is pending.
The discovery stay affects Peter Delgado and the defendants—the City of New York and Officers MD Samsuddin, Wilfred Martinez, Kyle Ting, and Sergeant Luis Rodriguez—while the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings remains pending.
What happened
Peter Delgado sued the City of New York and named police officers, alleging false arrest, excessive force, and malicious prosecution arising from three arrests. The parties voluntarily dismissed the federal excessive-force and malicious-prosecution claims, and defendants later filed a motion seeking partial judgment on the pleadings.
Defendants asked the court, with plaintiff’s consent, to pause discovery while that motion was pending. They argued that the motion could significantly narrow the remaining issues and that continuing discovery, including possible depositions concerning three arrests, could impose unnecessary costs.
Judge Engelmayer granted the request and stayed discovery until the court resolves defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. The order did not decide that motion or the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Delgado v. City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-06320
- Paul Engelmayer
- Sept. 24, 2020
Background
Peter Delgado filed the action on July 8, 2019. He alleged that members of the New York City Police Department subjected him to false arrest, excessive force, and malicious prosecution on April 23, May 4, and September 22, 2018. Delgado filed an amended complaint, and defendants answered it.
The parties participated in discovery under the court’s Section 1983 Plan. Defendants produced materials including New York City Police Department paperwork, body-worn-camera footage, district attorney files, criminal court files, and disciplinary histories relating to three arrests and prosecutions. The parties had not yet completed all document discovery or taken depositions.
On August 26, 2020, the court endorsed a stipulation and order voluntarily dismissing Delgado’s federal claims for excessive force and malicious prosecution. On September 21, 2020, defendants filed a motion for partial judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), which asks the court to decide claims based on the pleadings.
Request to Stay Discovery
Defendants asked the court, with Delgado’s consent, to stay—or pause—discovery while the Rule 12(c) motion was pending. They argued that the motion sought to dismiss all claims related to two arrests and all claims related to the third arrest except a false-arrest claim. According to defendants, granting the motion could significantly narrow the remaining discovery and reduce the parties’ costs and burdens.
The letter also addressed the court’s COVID-19 emergency rules. Those rules prohibited courtesy copies of filings from being submitted to chambers when they conflicted with the court’s individual rules. Defendants stated that two body-worn-camera exhibits were too large to file electronically and would instead be provided by email under the emergency rules.
Ruling
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted defendants’ request. The court ordered that discovery in the case be stayed pending resolution of defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. The opinion does not state a ruling on the underlying Rule 12(c) motion or decide the merits of Delgado’s remaining claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.