Weiss v. City University of New York
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:17-cv-03557
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Weiss v. City University of New York, Judge Figueredo granted an application requiring Weiss to comply with an earlier discovery order.
Weiss was required to produce the requested documents or verify her responses by June 30, 2022. The defendants were permitted to pursue completion of the outstanding discovery.
What happened
In Weiss v. City University of New York, the defendants asked the court to require Weiss to comply with an earlier order about documents requested after her deposition. The earlier order required her either to produce responsive documents or verify her responses.
Weiss filed a letter on her own asking the court to reconsider that earlier order. The defendants opposed reconsideration, arguing that she had not shown an overlooked controlling decision, new evidence, or a clear error. They also asked for a deadline for compliance.
The court, through Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo, granted the application and directed Weiss to comply with the earlier order by June 30, 2022. Judge Broderick is identified in the case information as the district judge. The clerk was directed to close the motion at docket entry 181.
The detailed version
- Weiss v. City University of New York · No. 1:17-cv-03557
- Vernon Broderick
- June 13, 2022
Background
The defendants had requested documents from Weiss after her deposition. On May 20, 2022, Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo granted the defendants’ motion to compel and ordered Weiss either to produce documents responsive to Document Requests 2 and 4 or to verify her responses to those requests.
The defendants’ letter stated that Weiss’s lawyer, Susanne Toes Keane of the New York Legal Assistance Group, had represented Weiss during the relevant discovery and had opposed the motion to compel. The letter also stated that, after the May 20 order, Keane said her representation concerning the post-deposition discovery had ended. Weiss then filed a letter motion on her own asking the court to reconsider the May 20 order.
Court’s action
The order states “Application Granted.” It directs Weiss to comply with the May 20 order no later than June 30, 2022, and directs the clerk to close the motion at docket entry 181. The order does not expressly state that Weiss’s request for reconsideration was denied. The provided text also includes the defendants’ argument that reconsideration should be denied, but that argument is not itself the court’s ruling.
Effect
The ruling required Weiss to complete the specified discovery response by the stated deadline. The order addressed discovery compliance rather than deciding the underlying claims concerning the admissions decision. The case information identifies Vernon Broderick as the district judge, while the order itself identifies Valerie Figueredo as the United States magistrate judge who granted the application.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.