Cullum v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts Corp.
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-09700
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cullum v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Judge Netburn denied the plaintiffs’ discovery motions without prejudice because they were premature.
The plaintiffs’ ability to obtain discovery was postponed; the defendants’ pending motions to dismiss remained unresolved.
What happened
In Cullum v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts Corp., the plaintiffs filed two motions seeking discovery from the defendants.
The court explained that discovery generally cannot begin before the parties meet to discuss the case, unless an exception applies or the court authorizes it. The parties had not held that required meeting, and the court had not issued a scheduling order.
The court found no basis for expedited discovery and denied both motions without prejudice. Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn also said the court would wait to issue a scheduling order until the defendants’ pending motions to dismiss, including one seeking to compel arbitration, were resolved.
The detailed version
- Cullum v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts Corp. · No. 1:22-cv-09700
- Laura Swain
- June 5, 2023
Background
The plaintiffs filed two motions related to discovery. The court considered Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d), which generally prevents a party from seeking discovery before the parties hold the required meeting under Rule 26(f), unless an exception applies, the parties agree, or the court authorizes discovery.
Court’s Analysis
The case was not exempt from the initial-disclosure requirements. The parties had not held a Rule 26(f) conference, and the court had not entered a scheduling order under Rule 16(b). The court stated that it did not intend to issue a Rule 16(b) scheduling order until the defendants’ pending motions to dismiss were resolved, including one motion seeking to compel arbitration. The court also found no basis for allowing discovery on an expedited basis.
Ruling
The court ruled that the plaintiffs’ discovery motions were premature and denied both motions without prejudice. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 38 and 39. The opinion was signed by United States Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.