Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 4, 2023

Hager-Reilly v. SCO Family of Services

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:21-cv-11023
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscoveryPro Se
In one sentence

In Hager-Reilly v. SCO Family of Services, Magistrate Judge Cave extended discovery and ordered compliance with discovery and filing deadlines.

Who this affects

Cheryl Hager-Reilly and SCO Family of Services, particularly their discovery obligations and upcoming filing deadlines.

What happened

In Hager-Reilly v. SCO Family of Services, Cheryl Hager-Reilly did not attend a scheduled conference, and the defendant reported that she had not followed earlier orders requiring document production. The court warned that missing conferences or failing to provide the required materials could lead to sanctions, including dismissal for failure to prosecute.

The court gave Hager-Reilly a final extension until January 13, 2023, to provide bank statements, pay stubs, Forms W-2, and relevant non-privileged employment-related communications. It also ordered the defendant to file a letter-motion about notes Hager-Reilly had at her deposition by January 6, with her response due January 13, and extended fact discovery to February 6.

Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave’s order was a case-management and discovery order; it did not decide the underlying claims. The parties had to file a joint letter confirming completion of fact discovery by February 13, 2023.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hager-Reilly v. SCO Family of Services · No. 1:21-cv-11023
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
Jan. 4, 2023

Background

The court issued this order after a January 4, 2023, telephone status conference. Cheryl Hager-Reilly, who was representing herself, did not attend even though she had received a mailed order notifying her of the conference. The court stated that attendance at scheduled conferences was required and warned that missing a conference without extraordinary circumstances could result in sanctions, including dismissal for failure to prosecute.

During the conference, the defendant’s lawyer stated that Hager-Reilly had not complied with earlier orders requiring her to produce several categories of documents. Those orders required production of bank statements, pay stubs, Forms W-2, and a search of her personal email for relevant, non-privileged communications concerning her employment with the defendant or the lawsuit.

Orders

The court gave Hager-Reilly a final extension to comply with the earlier discovery orders by January 13, 2023. The court again warned that failure to comply could result in sanctions, including dismissal for failure to prosecute, while recognizing that people representing themselves receive additional leeway in following litigation procedures.

The court also ordered the defendant to file, by January 6, a letter-motion concerning notes Hager-Reilly had at her deposition and to attach relevant transcript excerpts. Hager-Reilly’s response was due January 13. The court extended the fact-discovery deadline to February 6 and required the parties to submit a joint letter certifying completion of fact discovery by February 13.

Disposition and Significance

Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave entered a procedural case-management and discovery order. The order did not dismiss the case, impose sanctions, or decide the parties’ underlying claims. The opinion identifies Sarah L. Cave as the signing judge, although the supplied case metadata lists John Koeltl.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.