Khen v. US Coachways, Inc.
- Rochon
- 1:23-cv-10762
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Khen v. US Coachways, Judge Rochon stayed discovery while considering Coachways’ motion for judgment on the pleadings.
The plaintiffs and defendant US Coachways, Inc.; discovery in the case is paused while the court considers Coachways’ motion for judgment on the pleadings.
What happened
Khen v. US Coachways, Inc. involves claims by named plaintiffs who say Coachways canceled bus trips to a pro-Israel rally because they were Jewish and/or Israeli nationals. The plaintiffs asserted federal, state, and local civil-rights claims, along with contract and negligence claims, and sought broad discovery.
Coachways asked the court to pause discovery while it pursued a motion for judgment on the pleadings seeking dismissal of all claims. It argued that the discovery requests were overly broad, that the case was still at an early stage, and that its motion raised substantial grounds for dismissal.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon found good cause to pause discovery. She concluded that the requested discovery was substantial, the pause would not cause unfair prejudice, and Coachways had raised substantial arguments addressing all claims. The court stayed discovery pending resolution of the motion and directed the clerk to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 36 and 38.
The detailed version
- Khen v. US Coachways, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-10762
- Rochon
- May 23, 2024
Background
The provided text includes a May 17, 2024 letter from counsel for defendant US Bus Charter & Limo Inc. d/b/a US Coachways, s/h/a US Coachways, Inc., followed by the court’s May 23, 2024 order. The letter says that the named plaintiffs brought claims on behalf of a proposed class after Coachways allegedly canceled transportation to and from a pro-Israel rally in Washington, D.C. The plaintiffs allegedly claimed that the cancellations occurred because they were Jewish and/or Israeli nationals. The asserted claims included federal, state, and local civil-rights claims, negligence, and breach of contract.
Motion and Arguments
Coachways moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) for judgment on the pleadings, seeking dismissal of the amended complaint in its entirety. The letter identifies arguments concerning the Title VI claim, the claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Federal Transit Administration Act claim, New York State and New York City claims, the Connecticut public-accommodations claim, breach of contract, and negligence. The court’s order did not decide those claims.
Coachways also sought a stay of discovery while the court considered its Rule 12(c) motion. It argued that the plaintiffs’ discovery requests sought potentially thousands of documents covering multiple years, a national area, bus reservations, transportation records, third-party relationships, and other large-scale event records. Coachways argued that the litigation was at an early stage and that its motion presented strong grounds for dismissal.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that Coachways had shown good cause to stay discovery pending resolution of its motion for judgment on the pleadings. It applied three considerations: the breadth of the discovery sought, whether a stay would cause unfair prejudice, and the strength of the motion.
The court found that the discovery was substantial, particularly because the requests covered multiple years. It also found that delaying discovery at this stage would not cause the plaintiff unfair prejudice, while noting that Coachways was expected to comply with its obligations to preserve evidence. Finally, the court found that Coachways had raised substantial arguments for dismissal addressing all claims in the complaint.
Disposition
The court concluded that a stay of discovery was warranted at that time. It did not rule on whether any claim should be dismissed or otherwise decide the merits of the parties’ underlying dispute. The clerk was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 36 and 38.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.