Calderon v. 919 Prospect Avenue LLC
- James Oetken
- 1:22-cv-00096
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Calderon v. 919 Prospect Avenue LLC, Judge Oetken approved alternative subpoena service, ordered Monte Shinn’s deposition, and extended discovery seven days.
The order affected the plaintiffs, the defendants, nonparty Monte Shinn, and the fact-discovery schedule in the case.
What happened
In Calderon v. 919 Prospect Avenue LLC, Jose Calderon and the other plaintiffs asked to serve a subpoena on nonparty Monte Shinn in an alternative way and require him to appear for a deposition before fact discovery ended. Defendants did not respond to the request.
The court granted all of the requested relief. It ruled that serving Shinn’s cotenant on April 17 was effective, ordered Shinn to appear for a deposition, and found that the subpoena was properly issued and sought relevant information. The court also extended the fact-discovery deadline by seven days, to May 21, 2024.
J. Paul Oetken directed Shinn to make himself available for the deposition by May 21, 2024, and directed the parties to file a joint status letter by that date.
The detailed version
- Calderon v. 919 Prospect Avenue LLC · No. 1:22-cv-00096
- James Oetken
- May 14, 2024
Background
On May 6, 2024, the plaintiffs filed a letter motion seeking permission to serve a subpoena on nonparty Monte Shinn through an alternative method and asking the court to require Shinn to appear for a deposition before the end of fact discovery. The defendants did not file a response.
Rulings
The court granted the plaintiffs’ requested relief in three respects:
1. Alternative service: The court granted the plaintiffs permission to use alternative service and found that serving Shinn’s cotenant on April 17, as described in the motion, constituted effective service. The court relied on the principle that Rule 45 does not itself require personal service when an alternative method is reasonably designed to ensure that a witness receives the subpoena.
2. Deposition: The court granted the motion to compel Shinn to appear for a deposition before the end of fact discovery. It found that the subpoena was properly issued and that the information sought was relevant to the proceeding.
3. Discovery deadline: The court extended the fact-discovery deadline by seven days, from the existing deadline to May 21, 2024, so that Shinn could be deposed. Shinn was required to make himself available for the deposition by May 21.
The court also directed the parties to file a joint status letter by May 21, 2024.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.