Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 20, 2022

Kriegman v. Mirrow

Judge
Paul Gardephe
Docket
1:21-cv-03823
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
9
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Kriegman v. Mirrow, Judge Gardephe denied Fatima Mirrow’s motion to quash or modify subpoenas and ordered her deposition by July 29, 2022.

Who this affects

Fatima Mirrow was required to proceed with the subpoenaed deposition and handwriting-exemplar process; the ruling also affected Bruce P. Kriegman, acting as trustee for LLS America, who sought that discovery.

What happened

In Kriegman v. Mirrow, Bruce P. Kriegman, acting as Chapter 11 trustee for LLS America, sought discovery from Fatima Mirrow, including a deposition and handwriting samples. Fatima Mirrow asked the court to determine whether she was competent to give testimony or, alternatively, to modify the subpoenas, citing her physical and mental condition.

The trustee objected, arguing that earlier courts had rejected similar objections and that the medical and mental-health materials submitted with the renewed motion did not establish that Fatima Mirrow could not be deposed. The trustee also argued that she had important information about her financial affairs and dealings with Alex Mirrow.

Judge Gardephe denied Fatima Mirrow’s renewed motion to quash or modify the subpoenas. He ordered that her deposition take place by July 29, 2022; if it did not occur by then and the parties could not agree on another date, it would take place at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse. The court stated that no further delay would be allowed.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Kriegman v. Mirrow · No. 1:21-cv-03823
Judge
Paul Gardephe
Date
July 20, 2022

Background

Bruce P. Kriegman, acting as Chapter 11 trustee for LLS America, sought information from Fatima Mirrow through subpoenas requiring her to provide documents, appear for a deposition, and sign handwriting exemplars. The trustee’s filing states that earlier objections based on Fatima Mirrow’s age, physical condition, and claimed memory problems had been rejected, and that the court had previously limited the deposition’s length and allowed it to occur remotely from her home if she wished.

The trustee objected to Fatima Mirrow’s renewed motion to quash or modify the subpoenas. The trustee argued that the medical and mental-health materials submitted with the motion were incomplete, unauthenticated, and unsworn, and did not establish that she was unable to testify. The trustee also argued that Fatima Mirrow had information relevant to Alex Mirrow’s financial affairs and dealings with her.

Ruling

The court denied Fatima Mirrow’s renewed motion to quash or, alternatively, to modify the subpoenas. The court ordered that her deposition take place by July 29, 2022. If the deposition did not occur by that date and the parties could not agree on another date, it would take place at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York. The court stated that no further delay would be tolerated and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at Docket Number 38.

This was a discovery ruling about compliance with subpoenas and the timing and location of a deposition. It did not decide the underlying dispute involving LLS America, the trustee, or the allegations concerning Alex Mirrow.

The authoritative version

Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.