Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 22, 2022

Milton v. Rehman

Judge
Ona Wang
Docket
1:19-cv-02770
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Milton v. Rehman, Judge Wang asked Milton about pro bono counsel for discovery and extended discovery to October 30, 2022.

Who this affects

Robert Milton, the defendants, and the discovery schedule in the case.

What happened

In Milton v. Rehman, Robert Milton was representing himself, and the court reviewed letters from the defendants, an affidavit from Sergeant Marmolejos, and Milton’s letter about the case.

The court said the discovery dispute had become more complicated and noted that Milton had previously asked for help litigating the case. The court was also concerned that the City had not produced relevant video evidence that it acknowledged should normally have been created and preserved.

Judge Wang directed Milton to tell the court by August 5, 2022, whether he wanted a volunteer lawyer for the limited purpose of completing discovery, including depositions. The court also extended discovery to October 30, 2022; it did not appoint a lawyer in this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Milton v. Rehman · No. 1:19-cv-02770
Judge
Ona Wang
Date
July 22, 2022

Background

Robert Milton, who was representing himself, sued Correction Officer Rehman and other defendants. After reviewing letters from the defendants, an affidavit from Sergeant Marmolejos, and Milton’s letter, the court addressed whether a volunteer lawyer should be appointed for a limited purpose.

The court explained that the discovery dispute had become more complex over the preceding months. Milton had previously sought guidance about litigating the case, including how to complete service, and had said he was having difficulty managing the case without a lawyer. The court also expressed concern that the City had not produced relevant portions of video evidence that it admitted should have been created and preserved in the normal course.

Order

The court raised the possibility of appointing pro bono counsel—that is, a lawyer serving without charge—for the limited purpose of completing discovery, including depositions. It directed Milton to inform the court by August 5, 2022, whether he wanted such counsel. The order did not appoint counsel. The court extended the discovery deadline to October 30, 2022, and directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order to Milton.

Effect

This was a case-management and discovery order. It addressed possible assistance for Milton and extended the discovery schedule; it did not decide the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.