Van Duser v. Tozzer Ltd.

Background

The defendants asked the court to stay, or pause, all discovery until the court resolved their pending motion to dismiss. The request was made under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), which allows a court to limit or pause discovery for good cause. The plaintiffs did not consent to the request. The parties had met and conferred but reached an impasse.

The defendants argued that their motion to dismiss presented substantial grounds for ending the case. They contended that the Fair Labor Standards Act did not provide a claim for unlawful retention of tips or unpaid “gap-time,” that the complaint did not adequately allege a willful violation, that some claims were time-barred, that related New York Labor Law claims should not remain in federal court, and that Jonathan Toubin was not properly included because he was allegedly not the plaintiffs’ employer. The opinion text presents these arguments as positions in the pending dismissal motion; it does not decide them here.

Arguments About Discovery

The defendants argued that discovery would be unusually broad and burdensome because the case involved twelve plaintiffs, seven defendants, six bars and live-music venues, a period beginning in 2015, and proposed class and collective claims. They also argued that the key information was contained in preserved time and payroll records, so delaying discovery would not unfairly prejudice the plaintiffs.

Ruling

After reviewing the parties’ letters, Judge Subramanian did not grant the requested stay. The court adopted the proposed schedule, which provided the parties with additional months, and allowed the case to continue while the court evaluated the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The order therefore resolved the discovery-stay request; it did not decide the merits of the motion to dismiss or the wage claims.