Bromfield v. Bronx Lebanon Special Care Center, Inc.

Background

Lenora Bromfield, representing herself, filed a letter that the court treated as a motion for reconsideration of the court’s February 28, 2022 post-conference order. That earlier order granted the defendants’ request for additional damages documents after Bromfield’s reopened deposition and denied Bromfield’s request to take additional depositions.

In 2018, Bromfield had told Judge Henry B. Pitman that she was giving up her right to take depositions and asked for permission to serve up to 100 interrogatories instead. Judge Pitman’s order recognized that waiver and permitted the additional interrogatories. Fact discovery closed in 2018. It was reopened in November 2021 only to allow questions about Bromfield’s new race-discrimination claims during a limited reopening of her deposition.

Bromfield later asked to depose Janice Hamilton, Melissa Santos, Ian Andrews, and George Brobbey regarding paperwork discrepancies and document authentication. In her reconsideration motion, she asked the court to vacate her earlier waiver, asserting that it was based on “FRAUD,” and to allow the four depositions. The defendants opposed the motion, noting that Bromfield did not identify any misrepresentation supporting her fraud assertion and had used the expanded interrogatory opportunity.

Legal standard

The court applied Local Civil Rule 6.3 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), which allow relief from an order in specified circumstances, including mistake, newly discovered evidence, fraud or misconduct, and other exceptional reasons. Reconsideration is an extraordinary remedy. It is generally available only when the court overlooked controlling law or information that could reasonably change its decision. It is not a chance to repeat rejected arguments or raise new arguments that could have been presented earlier.

Court’s reasoning

The court found that Bromfield had not alleged facts showing that any provision of Rule 60(b) applied. Although she referred to fraud, she offered no supporting allegations. The court also noted that she acknowledged she had been given a choice between waiving depositions and serving up to 100 interrogatories, and that she waited nearly four years after the waiver to raise the fraud allegation.

The court concluded that Bromfield had not shown that it overlooked controlling decisions or information concerning either Judge Pitman’s order or the February 28, 2022 post-conference order. Instead, the court viewed the motion as reflecting a change in Bromfield’s preferred discovery strategy rather than a court error.

Disposition

The court denied Bromfield’s letter-motion for reconsideration. The terms of the February 28, 2022 post-conference order therefore remained in effect, including its denial of additional depositions. The clerk was directed to mail the order and the post-conference order to Bromfield.