Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 1, 2023

Onate v. AHRC Health Care, Inc.

Judge
Willis
Docket
1:20-cv-08292
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Onate v. AHRC Health Care, Judge Willis granted the motion to compel AHRC’s CFO’s deposition but allowed flexible scheduling.

Who this affects

The plaintiff who sought the deposition and AHRC Health Care, Inc., whose Chief Financial Officer was ordered to appear for a deposition.

What happened

In Onate v. AHRC Health Care, a plaintiff asked the court to require AHRC Health Care, Inc. to produce its Chief Financial Officer, Amy West, for a deposition.

The court granted the motion to compel. It also ruled that West’s deposition did not have to occur first, even though the plaintiff had scheduled it before the other depositions.

At a March 1, 2023 conference, Judge Jennifer E. Willis explained that flexible scheduling would allow better witness preparation and scheduling. The order did not require West’s deposition to occur in a specific sequence.

The detailed version

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

Case
Onate v. AHRC Health Care, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-08292
Judge
Willis
Date
Mar. 1, 2023

Background

On February 7, 2023, a plaintiff filed a motion to compel the deposition of AHRC Health Care, Inc.’s Chief Financial Officer, Amy West. AHRC opposed the motion on February 10, 2023. The court held a conference attended by both parties on March 1, 2023.

Ruling

The court granted the motion to compel West’s deposition. The court also ruled that the deposition did not have to occur first, even though the plaintiff had noticed it before the other depositions. The court cited authority recognizing its ability to set the timing and sequence of discovery, including Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d).

Effect

AHRC was required to provide West for a deposition, but the deposition could be scheduled after other depositions. The order did not specify a particular deposition date.

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.