Harvey v. Permanent Mission of The Republic of Sierra Leone to the United…

Background

The plaintiffs’ letter stated that discovery had been stayed while the Mission appealed the court’s denial of its motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The letter further stated that the Second Circuit had affirmed the court’s conclusion that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act did not bar the lawsuit because the conduct underlying the claims qualified as commercial activity.

The plaintiffs asked the court to lift the stay, establish a schedule for the rest of the case, and hold a status conference concerning Foley Hoag’s anticipated motion to withdraw as the Mission’s counsel. They also asked the court to require the Mission to obtain new counsel promptly if withdrawal were allowed. The plaintiffs’ letter described their allegations concerning the Mission’s renovation of its headquarters and the continuing delay, but the order did not decide those allegations.

Ruling

Judge Edgardo Ramos lifted the discovery stay as to the Mission. The court scheduled a telephone conference for May 7, 2024, at 10:30 a.m. to address Foley Hoag’s motion to withdraw and the status of discovery after resolution of the interlocutory appeal. The clerk was directed to terminate motions at docket numbers 196 and 197. The order did not state that the motion to withdraw was granted or denied.