Edward Henry v. Fox News Network, L.L.C.

Background

The opinion text consists of defense counsel’s renewed application to stay discovery in Edward Henry’s action against Fox News Network, L.L.C. and Suzanne Scott. Defendants had previously sought a discovery stay while their first motion to dismiss was pending. After Henry amended his complaint, Defendants filed another motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and New York’s anti-SLAPP statute, then renewed their request to stay discovery.

Arguments

Defendants argued that the motion to dismiss presented substantial grounds for dismissing the amended complaint. They identified arguments concerning Henry’s defamation claims, including alleged failures to plead falsity, actionable non-opinion statements, and facts supporting actual malice, as well as the possible application of the fair-report privilege. They also argued that Henry’s false-light and tortious-interference claims were subject to dismissal.

Defendants further argued that discovery could be broad, expensive, and burdensome because the allegations covered events over several years and included matters beyond the allegedly defamatory statements. They asserted that a stay would protect defendants from unnecessary discovery burdens while the dismissal motion was pending and that Henry would not be prejudiced because briefing on the motion was complete.

Ruling

Judge Ronnie Abrams granted the application. The court stated that, after considering the relevant factors, a stay was appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The court ordered that discovery be stayed pending resolution of the motion to dismiss.

The order did not decide the motion to dismiss or the underlying claims. It therefore resolved only the discovery issue addressed in the application.