Lyons v. New York Life Insurance Company
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:20-cv-03120
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Lyons v. New York Life Insurance Company, Judge Engelmayer allowed Lyons to take an eleventh deposition after NY Life identified the wrong knowledgeable employee.
Lorraine Lyons may take a deposition of Jeff Goldstein as her eleventh deposition in the case; New York Life Insurance Company must respond to that permitted discovery.
What happened
In Lyons v. New York Life Insurance Company, Lorraine Lyons asked to depose Jeff Goldstein as her eleventh witness. She said New York Life had identified Beth McGrath as the human-resources employee who knew why Lyons was terminated, but McGrath testified that Goldstein had that knowledge instead.
The court found that Lyons had used one of her ten permitted depositions on McGrath because of New York Life’s inaccurate disclosure. It decided that allowing another deposition was reasonable and necessary, rather than unreasonably repetitive, and treated the request as giving Lyons a chance to proceed as if the correct witness had been identified initially.
Judge Engelmayer granted Lyons permission to depose Goldstein as her eleventh deposition and directed the clerk to terminate the motion at docket 38. The order addressed discovery only and did not decide the underlying employment-discrimination and retaliation claims.
The detailed version
- Lyons v. New York Life Insurance Company · No. 1:20-cv-03120
- Paul Engelmayer
- June 4, 2021
Background
Lorraine Lyons requested permission to take an eleventh deposition in her case against New York Life Insurance Company. New York Life opposed the request. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30 generally requires court permission or the other side’s consent for more than ten depositions. Under Rule 26, the court must limit discovery that is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or that could be obtained from a more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive source.
Lyons did not argue that the case generally required more than ten depositions. Instead, she argued that New York Life had mistakenly identified Beth McGrath as the human-resources witness with relevant knowledge about Lyons’s termination. During McGrath’s deposition, McGrath testified that she had not reviewed the substance of Lyons’s alleged performance issues or the facts underlying them, and that Jeff Goldstein had the relevant knowledge. New York Life stated that it also first learned of Goldstein’s involvement during McGrath’s deposition.
Court’s Analysis
The court concluded that Lyons’s request was reasonable and necessary. If New York Life’s discovery responses had accurately identified Goldstein, Lyons would have deposed Goldstein instead of McGrath and would not have needed an additional deposition. The court characterized the request as allowing Lyons to proceed as though New York Life had identified the correct human-resources witness from the beginning.
The court compared the situation to cases in which a party discloses a trial witness late and discovery is reopened for the limited purpose of allowing that witness’s deposition. It rejected New York Life’s argument that the request should be postponed until Lyons completed ten other depositions. The court also found New York Life’s cited authority inapplicable because that case involved a request for 75 depositions before discovery had begun.
Ruling
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted Lyons leave to depose Jeff Goldstein as her eleventh deposition. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion pending at docket 38. The order did not resolve the underlying employment-discrimination and retaliation action or decide whether either party was correct on those claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.