Blanco v. Success Academy Charter Schools, Inc.

What the court addressed

The defendants requested a stay of discovery, meaning a temporary pause in the exchange of information and documents, while their fully briefed motion to dismiss was pending. Plaintiff Marilyn Blanco consented to the request. The court’s memo endorsement states: “Discovery is stayed on consent of the parties.”

The parties’ positions

The defendants argued that Blanco had served very broad document requests and interrogatories. They said the requests sought information reaching back to 2013 and involving students with individualized education programs or disabilities across Success Academy’s New York City schools, rather than focusing on the events alleged in this case. The defendants also argued that responding would impose a significant burden and that their motion to dismiss could result in dismissal or substantial narrowing of Blanco’s claims.

The defendants’ letter further stated that their motion challenged Blanco’s Second through Sixth Causes of Action, that defendant Alvarez had not been served, and that Blanco had failed to state claims including abuse of process and supervisory liability. Those statements describe the defendants’ arguments; this opinion does not resolve the motion to dismiss.

Ruling and case-management instructions

Judge Lewis J. Liman stayed discovery based on the parties’ consent. The court directed the parties to submit a revised case-management plan within two weeks after a decision on the motion to dismiss. It also adjourned all dates under the existing case-management plan pending further order. The endorsement did not decide the pending motion to dismiss or the merits of Blanco’s claims.

Classification

This is a procedural order concerning discovery and case management. It does not decide the underlying claims or the pending motion to dismiss.