Pierre v. City Of New York

Background

Burbran Pierre asserts claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, New York Labor Law, and New York City’s Freelance Isn’t Free Act based on his participation in the New York City Police Department’s Paid Detail Program. The opinion states that Pierre performed off-duty, uniformed security work for hourly pay for several business defendants beginning in March 2012. He also asserts a retaliation claim against the New York City Police Department, alleging that it ended his eligibility for the program after he complained that his wages were being improperly withheld. Pierre seeks to bring the claims on behalf of himself and others similarly situated.

The deposition-time dispute

The City of New York, the Police Department, Duane Reade Inc., B&H Photo Video Pro Audio LLC, and Bloomberg L.P. asked for eight additional hours to examine Pierre at his deposition. Whole Foods Market Group, Inc. and TD Bank N.A. did not join the request. The proposed eight hours would have brought the deposition to 15 hours total. Pierre opposed the request and argued that defendants should receive only one additional hour.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30 generally limits a deposition to one day or seven hours. The court may allow more time when necessary to examine the witness fairly, and a party seeking more time must show good cause. The court rejected Pierre’s argument that defendants could not show good cause before the deposition began.

Court’s reasoning

Judge Valerie Figueredo found good cause for extending the deposition. The court determined that the case was not simply a straightforward wage dispute. The vendor defendants sought to defend against claims that they were Pierre’s joint employers under the wage laws, which would require questioning about control, supervision, hiring and firing, and pay. Duane Reade also needed to ask about Pierre’s work during numerous shifts at multiple stores with different policies and staff. The City needed to question Pierre about his participation in the program over more than 10 years and about his employment history concerning the retaliation claim. Defendants also needed to address Pierre’s proposed group claims and whether he could serve as an adequate representative of the proposed group.

The court nevertheless found that B&H and Bloomberg had not shown why each needed three additional hours because Pierre worked only one shift for each business. Their questioning would be narrower than the questioning required by Duane Reade and the City.

Disposition

The court’s order states: “Defendants’ motion to extend Plaintiff’s deposition is GRANTED for an additional four hours.” The order therefore allowed four additional deposition hours, rather than the eight requested.