Barry v. United States
- Barbara Moses
- 1:21-cv-07684
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Barry v. United States, Judge Moses granted a request to stay discovery while the Government’s dismissal-or-transfer motion is pending.
Barry and the United States; discovery is paused, and the initial case-management conference is adjourned without a new date.
What happened
Barry sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act, claiming that customs officials wrongly treated him as an adult and that immigration officials unlawfully detained him for four months in an adult facility in Texas. He asserted Texas-law claims including false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and negligence per se.
The Government had asked to dismiss the case or transfer it to the Southern District of Texas. It argued that the claims failed under Texas law or that the court lacked authority over one claim, and said that broad discovery would be burdensome while that motion was pending. Barry agreed to the requested discovery stay.
Judge Barbara Moses granted the application and stayed discovery until the court rules on the Government’s motion to dismiss or transfer the case. She also adjourned the initial case-management conference without setting a new date.
The detailed version
- Barry v. United States · No. 1:21-cv-07684
- Barbara Moses
- Feb. 16, 2022
Background
Barry brought this action under the Federal Tort Claims Act, a statute that permits certain lawsuits against the United States for torts covered by the statute. He alleged that United States Customs and Border Protection wrongly determined that he was an adult when he entered the United States at Hidalgo, Texas, and that United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement unlawfully detained him for four months at Port Isabel Detention Center, an adult detention facility in Los Fresnos, Texas. He asserted Texas-law claims for false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and negligence per se, and alleged emotional distress, depression, anxiety, and fear.
Motion and Request to Stay Discovery
The Government had filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) to dismiss the complaint, or alternatively to transfer the action to the Southern District of Texas under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The Government argued that several claims failed under Texas law, that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the negligence-per-se claim because it lacked a private legal analog, and that the negligence-per-se claim also failed to state a claim. The Government also argued that the operative facts, most witnesses, substantive law, and evidence were located in Texas.
The Government requested a stay of discovery while the motion was pending. It argued that the motion could dispose of the entire case, eliminate some claims, or move the case to another district, and that the broad discovery Barry expected to pursue would likely burden the parties. Barry consented to the request.
Ruling
Judge Barbara Moses granted the application. Discovery in the case was stayed pending the court’s ruling on the Government’s motion to dismiss or, alternatively, to transfer venue. The initial case-management conference scheduled for February 23, 2022, was adjourned without a new date. The opinion does not decide the Government’s dismissal or transfer motion or the merits of Barry’s claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.