Hager-Reilly v. SCO Family of Services
- John Koeltl
- 1:21-cv-11023
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Hager-Reilly v. SCO Family of Services: Judge Cave denied Hager-Reilly’s request to pause discovery deadlines because she did not show likely irreparable harm.
Cheryl Hager-Reilly and SCO Family of Services, the parties whose discovery deadlines were the subject of the denied stay request.
What happened
In Hager-Reilly v. SCO Family of Services, Cheryl Hager-Reilly asked the court to pause the deadlines for exchanging information and taking depositions.
The court said a stay generally requires a showing of likely irreparable harm—harm that could not be adequately repaired later. It found that Hager-Reilly had not made that showing.
Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave denied the request and directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion. The court reminded the parties that they could contact chambers if an issue arose during depositions.
The detailed version
- Hager-Reilly v. SCO Family of Services · No. 1:21-cv-11023
- John Koeltl
- Nov. 14, 2022
Background
The court considered Cheryl Hager-Reilly’s letter-motion to stay, or pause, outstanding discovery deadlines. Discovery is the pretrial process in which parties obtain information and evidence from one another. The motion was docketed as ECF No. 71.
Court’s Analysis
The court stated that the principal prerequisite for a stay is “probable irreparable harm,” meaning likely harm that cannot be adequately remedied later. The court concluded that Hager-Reilly had failed to demonstrate probable irreparable harm.
Ruling
Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave denied the Motion to Stay. The Clerk of Court was directed to close ECF No. 71. The court also reminded the parties that they could contact chambers under the court’s individual practices if an issue arose during depositions.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.