Dass v. The City University of New York
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:18-cv-11325
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Dass v. CUNY, Judge Wang granted depositions of two witnesses but denied the request for costs.
Krishna Dass may take the depositions of Julio Centeno and Erik Smiles. The defendants—the City University of New York, Eugenio María de Hostos Community College, and Nathaniel Cruz—must produce them for those depositions; Dass’s request for costs was denied.
What happened
In Dass v. The City University of New York, Krishna Dass, who brought an employment-discrimination case against the defendants, asked to question Julio Centeno and Erik Smiles under oath. Dass said Centeno was the person she accused of sexual harassment and that Smiles was a relevant comparison employee.
Dass argued that Centeno could provide firsthand testimony about the alleged harassment and the defendants’ response. She also said Smiles could provide information about his pay classification, job duties, budget, authority, and treatment compared with hers. Dass additionally asked the court to award her the costs of bringing the motion.
Judge Wang granted Dass’s request to compel the depositions of Centeno and Smiles, but denied her request for costs in Dass v. The City University of New York.
The detailed version
- Dass v. The City University of New York · No. 1:18-cv-11325
- Vernon Broderick
- Aug. 4, 2021
Background
Krishna Dass brought an employment-discrimination action against the City University of New York, Eugenio María de Hostos Community College, and Nathaniel Cruz. In the filing addressed by the court, Dass sought an order requiring the defendants to produce Julio Centeno and Erik Smiles for depositions.
Dass alleged that Centeno sexually harassed her in October 2016 by accosting her in an equipment closet and demanding that she hug and kiss him before allowing her to leave. She also alleged that she reported the incident and that Hostos and CUNY failed to investigate or take action. Dass argued that Centeno’s firsthand account was relevant and would not duplicate other discovery.
Dass described Smiles as her successor as athletic director and said the defendants had acknowledged that he was an appropriate comparator. She sought his testimony about his pay-scale classification, promotion history, job duties, budget, access to facilities, authority, and treatment by the defendants. Dass alleged that she had been treated differently in several respects, including budget, staffing, facility-rental authority, and access to meetings, and said Smiles could provide firsthand information about those issues.
The request for costs
Dass also asked for costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, arguing that the defendants’ objections had forced her to bring the discovery motion. The opinion text does not include a separate substantive analysis of that request.
Ruling
Judge Ona T. Wang granted the motion to compel the depositions of Julio Centeno and Erik Smiles. The court denied Dass’s request for costs. The order addressed discovery and did not decide the merits of Dass’s employment-discrimination claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.