Snellinger v. Federal National Mortgage Association
- Reznik
- 7:19-cv-06574
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Snellinger v. Federal National Mortgage Association, Magistrate Judge Reznik ordered the Deokis to comply with subpoenas or face a contempt hearing.
Ramchand Deoki and Sandhya Deoki were ordered to comply with the subpoenas and prior court order. Defendants could seek attorney’s fees and costs if the court later found the Deokis in contempt.
What happened
In Snellinger v. Federal National Mortgage Association, the court addressed Ramchand Deoki and Sandhya Deoki’s continued failure to attend depositions and provide subpoenaed documents.
The subpoenas required Ramchand and Sandhya Deoki to attend separate depositions and bring specified documents. After they did not appear, the court issued an earlier order requiring compliance, but Defendants’ counsel reported that they still had not complied.
The court issued a second and final order requiring compliance and warned that continued noncompliance could lead to a hearing on contempt and monetary sanctions. Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik also directed defense counsel to arrange in-person service of the order and file proof of service.
The detailed version
- Snellinger v. Federal National Mortgage Association · No. 7:19-cv-06574
- Reznik
- Sept. 25, 2023
Background
This order concerns Ramchand Deoki, also identified in the opinion as Ramchand Deioki, and Sandhya Deoki, also identified as Sandhya Deioki. The court stated that they had continued not to comply with subpoenas requiring depositions and production of documents.
A subpoena served on Ramchand Deoki required him to testify at a deposition on April 25, 2023, and bring specified documents. He did not appear and did not contact Defendants’ counsel to reschedule. A subpoena served on Sandhya Deoki required her to testify at a deposition on July 19, 2023, and bring specified documents. She also did not appear or contact Defendants’ counsel to reschedule.
On August 15, 2023, the court ordered both individuals to comply with the subpoenas. The opinion states that the order was served on Sandhya Deoki and that copies were affixed to and later mailed to an address for Ramchand Deoki. According to Defendants’ counsel, neither individual had attempted to comply with the subpoenas after that order.
Ruling
The court ordered Ramchand and Sandhya Deoki, for a second and final time, to comply with the subpoenas and the prior court order. It warned that continued failure to comply could result in a contempt hearing and monetary sanctions requiring payment of Defendants’ reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.
The court did not hold either individual in contempt in this order. Instead, it stated that, if they continued not to comply, the court would schedule a hearing at which they would have to show why they should not be held in contempt. Defense counsel was directed to arrange in-person service of the order and file proof of service.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.