Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 25, 2022

Hye v. United States

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:21-cv-06304
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hye v. United States, Judge Schofield granted a discovery request and ordered a telephonic conference for August 2, 2022.

Who this affects

Patrick Hye and the United States in their ongoing discovery proceedings, including the scheduled depositions of Hye and his daughter.

What happened

In Hye v. United States, the Government told the court that a discovery conference was still necessary because Patrick Hye’s discovery responses were allegedly incomplete, including information about his lost-earnings claim.

The Government also said delays in receiving discovery responses and record-release authorizations required changes to the deadlines for depositions of Hye and his daughter. The parties jointly proposed extending those deadlines, but the opinion does not separately state whether that proposal was granted.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted the request, ordered the parties to appear by telephone for a discovery conference on August 2, 2022, and directed the Clerk of Court to close motions listed at docket numbers 41 and 51.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hye v. United States · No. 1:21-cv-06304
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
July 25, 2022

Background

The United States Attorney’s Office, representing the Government, responded to the court’s July 18, 2022, order. The Government said that a conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 was still necessary even though Patrick Hye had provided discovery responses on July 15, 2022. According to the Government, those responses were deficient. Hye had agreed to supplement them, particularly information calculating and supporting his claim for lost earnings, but the Government said it was uncertain when that would happen.

The Government asked for a Rule 37 conference so the court could set a deadline for Hye to provide the requested discovery and potentially prevent him from claiming lost-earnings damages if he failed to provide the information. The Government also reported that delays in receiving discovery responses and authorizations to obtain records required changes to the court-ordered deadlines for depositions of Hye and his daughter. The parties jointly proposed moving those deadlines to September 15 and September 30, 2022, respectively. The opinion identifies this as the first request for an extension.

Ruling

The order states “GRANTED.” The court directed the parties to appear for a telephonic conference on August 2, 2022, at 5:10 p.m., and instructed them to be ready to begin at that time. Judge Lorna G. Schofield also directed the Clerk of Court to close the motions at docket numbers 41 and 51. The text does not separately identify which requested relief corresponded to each docket number or expressly state whether the proposed deposition-date extensions were granted.

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.