Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 9, 2024

Megginson v. The City of New York

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:23-cv-06798
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Megginson v. City of New York, Judge Ramos granted defendants’ request to stay discovery until the motion to dismiss is resolved.

Who this affects

Michael E. Megginson and the defendants are affected because discovery in the matter is paused while the defendants’ motion to dismiss is pending.

What happened

In Michael E. Megginson v. City of New York, et al., the defendants asked the court to pause discovery while their motion to dismiss was pending.

Judge Ramos said the motion to dismiss presented substantial arguments and that pausing discovery would not unfairly harm Megginson.

Judge Ramos granted the request and ordered discovery stayed until the court resolves the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Megginson v. The City of New York · No. 1:23-cv-06798
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
May 9, 2024

Request

The defendants requested a stay of discovery, meaning that discovery would be paused while the court considered their motion to dismiss.

Court’s reasoning

Judge Ramos stated that the defendants’ motion presented substantial arguments for dismissal. He also concluded that staying discovery would not unfairly prejudice Megginson.

Disposition

The court granted the defendants’ request to stay discovery. Discovery in the matter will remain stayed pending resolution of the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss itself.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.