Charlemagne v. The Educational Alliance, Inc.
- Denise Cote
- 1:22-cv-01136
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Charlemagne v. The Educational Alliance, Inc., Plaintiff requests discovery relief and sanctions; Judge Cote’s ruling is not included.
The discovery dispute directly affects Patricia Charlemagne and The Educational Alliance, Inc.; the requested additional discovery would also involve Khalina Houston and Jean Desravines. The provided text does not show a court ruling affecting any party.
What happened
In Charlemagne v. The Educational Alliance, Inc., Plaintiff asked the court to address what she described as The Educational Alliance’s failure to provide evidence related to her race-based pay-discrimination claims.
Plaintiff said The Educational Alliance produced a redacted complaint by a former employee, Khalina Houston, after discovery had closed. She argued that the complaint involved similar pay-discrimination allegations and that a human-resources witness gave false or evasive testimony about it. Plaintiff requested additional documents, depositions or further questioning, sanctions, and reimbursement of costs.
The document provided is a letter requesting a conference and court action, not an order resolving those requests. Judge Cote’s ruling is not included in the text.
The detailed version
- Charlemagne v. The Educational Alliance, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-01136
- Denise Cote
- Mar. 20, 2023
Document and posture
The provided text is a March 16, 2023 letter from Plaintiff’s attorney to Judge Denise Cote. It asks for an informal conference concerning discovery disputes and alleged false or evasive statements. The text does not include a court order or state how the court ruled on the requests.
Plaintiff’s allegations
Plaintiff stated that The Educational Alliance, Inc. produced a heavily redacted race-discrimination complaint filed by her successor, Khalina Houston, 12 days after the close of discovery. Plaintiff argued that the complaint was relevant because it allegedly described pay discrimination involving a Black woman serving as an executive director, similar to Plaintiff’s allegations that she was paid less than white executive directors.
Plaintiff also accused The Educational Alliance’s head of human resources, Jean Desravines, of giving false or evasive deposition testimony about Houston’s complaint and compensation-related complaints. Plaintiff further argued that The Educational Alliance and its attorneys obstructed discovery by disputing the complaint’s relevance and by failing to correct the testimony.
Relief requested
Plaintiff asked the court to order The Educational Alliance to produce the complete, unredacted complaint, related communications, and investigation materials. She also requested permission to depose Houston and to question Desravines for two additional hours concerning the complaint. Finally, she requested sanctions for evasive or incomplete discovery responses or perjury and an award of costs under the federal discovery rules.
Disposition
No disposition appears in the provided text. The letter itself does not show that the court granted, denied, or otherwise resolved any request. Accordingly, the effect on the discovery dispute and the underlying employment claims cannot be determined from this text.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.