Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 8, 2023

Dass v. The City University of New York

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:18-cv-11325
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Dass v. The City University of New York, Judge Wang granted part of defendants’ protective-order request and limited plaintiff’s requests to admit.

Who this affects

Krishna Dass and the defendants were affected: plaintiff must narrow the requests for admission, and defendants must respond to the revised requests by the court-ordered deadline.

What happened

In Dass v. The City University of New York, the defendants asked the court for protection from plaintiff’s requests to admit, which are written statements that a party is asked to accept or deny.

Judge Wang granted the request for protection as to all requests about proving that documents are authentic. She also found that the hundreds of remaining requests were too burdensome as written and said they should instead be addressed through agreements before trial. Plaintiff must reduce the existing requests to 50, without subparts, and serve them by June 16, 2023.

The order set deadlines for defendants to respond and scheduled an August 15, 2023, post-discovery conference. Judge Ona T. Wang also directed the clerk to close two docket entries.

The detailed version

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

Case
Dass v. The City University of New York · No. 1:18-cv-11325
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
June 8, 2023

Issue and request

The defendants requested a protective order concerning plaintiff’s requests for admission. Requests for admission are written discovery requests asking another party to admit or deny stated facts or the authenticity of documents.

Ruling

The court granted defendants’ request for a protective order as to all requests for admission concerning the authentication of documents. The order did not state that the remaining requests were denied. Instead, it stated that the hundreds of other requests were better addressed as trial stipulations and were unduly burdensome as presently written.

The court directed plaintiff to narrow the existing requests for admission to 50 requests, with no subparts. Plaintiff was required to serve the revised requests by June 16, 2023, and defendants were required to respond by August 4, 2023.

Further proceedings

The court scheduled an in-person post-discovery status conference for August 15, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 20D at 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. The parties were directed to file a joint conference agenda by August 11, 2023. The clerk was directed to close ECF Nos. 193 and 196.

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.