Lawal v. Speach Family Candy Shoppe, Inc.
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:23-cv-02056
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Lawal v. Speach Family Candy Shoppe, Inc., Judge Broderick declined to set a case-management order and required a schedule for proposed motions.
The parties to the action—Rafia Lawal, who sues on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, and Speach Family Candy Shoppe, Inc.—were required to meet, confer, and submit a proposed briefing schedule.
What happened
In Lawal v. Speach Family Candy Shoppe, Inc., the parties could not agree on discovery deadlines because the defendant wanted discovery delayed until the court ruled on a planned motion for judgment on the pleadings. They also disagreed about whether an alternative dispute-resolution process was appropriate.
The court explained that discovery may be stayed only when there is good cause. It said the defendant must file a motion if it wants discovery stayed, rather than treating the proposed stay as part of the case schedule.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick directed the parties to meet, discuss the issues, and propose a schedule for motions to stay discovery, for judgment on the pleadings, and for any other relief they consider appropriate. He required a joint letter with that schedule by August 10, 2023, and did not enter a case-management order at that time.
The detailed version
- Lawal v. Speach Family Candy Shoppe, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-02056
- Vernon Broderick
- Aug. 4, 2023
Background
On July 28, 2023, the court directed the parties to file a joint letter and proposed case-management plan. The parties reported that they could not agree on discovery deadlines. The defendant proposed that discovery should not begin until after the court ruled on a forthcoming motion for judgment on the pleadings. The parties also disagreed about what, if any, alternative dispute-resolution mechanism would be appropriate.
Court’s Analysis
The court stated that discovery is properly stayed only upon a showing of good cause. It explained that if the defendant seeks a discovery stay, the proper procedure is to file a motion requesting that relief. The order did not decide whether discovery should be stayed, whether judgment on the pleadings should be granted, or which alternative dispute-resolution mechanism should be used.
Order
The court directed the parties to meet and confer and propose a briefing schedule for motions to stay discovery, for judgment on the pleadings, and for any other relief they believe appropriate at that stage. The parties had to submit a joint letter setting out the proposed schedule by August 10, 2023. Because the case’s status remained unsettled, the court did not enter a case-management order at that time. The order was issued by Judge Vernon S. Broderick.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.