Davis v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:21-cv-07090
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Davis v. Sedgwick, Judge Moses stayed discovery while the court considered dismissal and amendment motions.
The stay affects Laura Davis and Sedgwick Claims Management Services Inc. by pausing discovery until the pending dismissal and amendment motions are resolved or the court orders otherwise.
What happened
In Davis v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services Inc., Laura Davis brought claims against Sedgwick for race discrimination and defamation. Sedgwick moved to dismiss her Second Amended Complaint, and Davis filed another complaint that the court treated as a request for permission to amend.
The court granted Sedgwick’s request to stay discovery. Discovery will remain paused while the court considers the pending dismissal and amendment motions, or until the court orders otherwise. Davis did not oppose the discovery stay.
Judge Barbara Moses issued the order. She found that a potentially case-ending motion appeared to have substantial grounds and noted Davis’s lack of opposition to the requested stay.
The detailed version
- Davis v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services · No. 1:21-cv-07090
- Paul Gardephe
- Dec. 12, 2022
Background
Laura Davis filed a Second Amended Complaint alleging race-discrimination and defamation claims against Sedgwick Claims Management Services Inc. Sedgwick moved under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 12(b)(6) to dismiss that complaint. Its motion also asked the court to pause discovery while the dismissal motion was pending.
Davis responded to the dismissal motion by filing a Third Amended Complaint without first obtaining the court’s permission or Sedgwick’s consent. The court treated that filing as a motion for permission to amend under Rule 15(a)(2). Davis later opposed the dismissal motion and asked the court to reconsider its decision to treat the Third Amended Complaint as a motion for leave to amend. She did not oppose the requested discovery stay.
Ruling
The court granted the portion of Sedgwick’s motion seeking a stay of discovery. Discovery is stayed while the pending motions to dismiss and for leave to amend are resolved, or until further order of the court.
Judge Barbara Moses based the ruling on the pending potentially dispositive motion, which appeared to have substantial grounds, and on Davis’s non-opposition to the stay. The order did not decide the merits of the dismissal or amendment motions.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.