Figueroa v. City Of New York

Background

An Assistant Corporation Counsel representing the City of New York and David Dimitri asked to withdraw as counsel for defendants Mary Padovano and Giovanni Caggia. The lawyer stated that the Law Department had recently learned information creating a conflict that prevented it from continuing to represent Padovano and Caggia. The request said the information had not been known when the court previously denied a joint request to extend discovery.

The lawyer also requested a stay, or alternatively an extension, of fact and expert discovery. The stated purpose was to give Padovano and Caggia time to obtain new counsel before discovery continued, including party and non-party depositions. The letter said the City Defendants had produced more than 4,000 electronically stored documents by the court-ordered deadline and had been working with the plaintiff to schedule depositions. Plaintiff’s counsel took no position on the request to withdraw and was not opposed to a discovery stay resulting from the change in counsel.

Court’s order

The order directed the parties, including Padovano and Caggia, to appear for a telephone conference about Corporation Counsel’s application on January 14, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. It directed Corporation Counsel to file a letter explaining the basis for the conflict by January 12, 2021. The order allowed that submission to be filed privately and under seal and stated that the court expected counsel to have fully discussed the reasons for withdrawal with Padovano and Caggia.

The provided text does not expressly state that the court granted or denied the requests to withdraw as counsel or to stay or extend discovery. It shows that the court ordered further information and a conference regarding those requests.