Fleisig v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company
- Denise Cote
- 1:21-cv-09341
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Fleisig v. The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., Magistrate Judge Aaron set deadlines for Defendant’s response and the parties’ proposed discovery schedule.
The plaintiff, Defendant, and the court-supervised schedule of the case were affected. Defendant received a deadline to respond to the Complaint, and the parties received a later deadline to propose a discovery-completion schedule if Defendant filed an Answer.
What happened
In Fleisig v. The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., the court reviewed the parties’ joint letter about a proposed schedule.
The court ordered Defendant to respond to the Complaint by July 8, 2022. If Defendant filed a motion against the Complaint and sought to pause discovery, it had to explain why there was good cause for the pause. If Defendant filed an Answer, the parties had to discuss the schedule and submit a joint letter proposing when discovery should be completed by July 15, 2022.
Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron entered the scheduling order on June 2, 2022.
The detailed version
- Fleisig v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company · No. 1:21-cv-09341
- Denise Cote
- June 2, 2022
Background
The court reviewed a joint letter in which the parties stated their positions about a proposed schedule.
Order
The court ordered Defendant to respond to the Complaint no later than July 8, 2022. If Defendant moved against the Complaint and requested a stay of discovery—a pause in the exchange of information between the parties—Defendant had to state good cause for that stay.
If Defendant filed an Answer, the parties then had to meet and discuss a schedule. They had to file a joint letter proposing a schedule for completing discovery no later than July 15, 2022.
Disposition
This was a scheduling order. It set deadlines and conditions for the next steps in the case; it did not decide the merits of the claims or defenses.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.