National Coalition on Black Civic Participation v. Wohl
- Jed Rakoff
- 1:20-cv-08668
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In National Coalition on Black Civic Participation v. Wohl, Judge Rakoff’s submitted record contains plaintiffs’ trial-disclosure request, not a court ruling.
The plaintiffs and defendants Wohl and Burkman in the pending civil case; the submitted material concerns defendants’ possible trial testimony and the plaintiffs’ requested additional discovery.
What happened
In National Coalition on Black Civic Participation v. Wohl, the plaintiffs said defendants Wohl and Burkman refused to answer nearly every substantive deposition question by invoking their constitutional protection against self-incrimination. Plaintiffs said defendants later suggested they might testify at trial without confirming whether they would withdraw that protection.
Plaintiffs asked the court to require defendants to say by November 4, 2023, whether they would withdraw their assertions and testify. They asked that defendants be barred from testifying if they did not respond, or that discovery be reopened so plaintiffs could question them about damages if they chose to testify.
The submitted material does not show a ruling on these requests. The case information identifies Judge Jed Rakoff, although the letter itself is addressed to Judge Victor Marrero; no disposition by Judge Rakoff appears in the submitted text.
The detailed version
- National Coalition on Black Civic Participation v. Wohl · No. 1:20-cv-08668
- Jed Rakoff
- Oct. 5, 2023
Nature of the Submitted Material
The submitted text is a letter from plaintiffs’ counsel dated October 4, 2023, asking the court to address defendants’ possible trial testimony. It does not contain a judicial opinion, an order, or a disposition of the requests. The case information identifies Judge Jed Rakoff, but the letter is addressed to Judge Victor Marrero, creating an unresolved inconsistency in the supplied materials.
Plaintiffs’ Position
Plaintiffs said defendants Wohl and Burkman invoked the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination in response to nearly every substantive deposition question. Plaintiffs also said defense counsel had not confirmed whether defendants intended to withdraw those assertions and testify at trial, despite requests made in August and October 2023.
Plaintiffs asked the court to require defendants to disclose by November 4, 2023, whether they intended to withdraw their Fifth Amendment assertions and testify. Plaintiffs requested that the court bar defendants from testifying if they did not make the required disclosure. Alternatively, if defendants intended to testify, plaintiffs asked to reopen discovery for limited depositions concerning damages and necessary follow-up questions. Plaintiffs argued that allowing defendants to invoke the privilege during discovery and later testify on the same subjects would create unfair prejudice and a strategic advantage.
Disposition
The submitted text records plaintiffs’ requests but does not state that the court granted, denied, or otherwise resolved them. Judge Rakoff’s ruling, if any, is not included in the supplied material.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.