Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 24, 2024

Burton v. America

Judge
Rearden
Docket
1:18-cv-02039
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Burton v. United States, Judge Rearden granted a discovery extension but denied email service for a foreign nonparty deposition subpoena.

Who this affects

The ruling affects the Estate of Franklin Sanchez, the family-member plaintiffs, the United States, the individually sued Bureau of Prisons employees, and the nonparty foreign witness whose subpoena could not be served by email.

What happened

Burton v. United States concerns claims by the Estate of Franklin Sanchez and family members after Mr. Sanchez died while in Bureau of Prisons custody. The United States faces a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act, and several Bureau of Prisons employees face individual-capacity claims under a Supreme Court decision allowing certain constitutional damages claims against federal officials.

The parties jointly requested more time to complete discovery, including depositions of plaintiffs, inmates, a defendant, Bureau of Prisons officials, and a nonparty witness. They asked to extend fact discovery to July 15, 2024, and adjust later expert-discovery deadlines accordingly. Plaintiffs also asked for permission to serve a deposition subpoena by email on a nonparty foreign national located outside the United States.

Judge Jennifer H. Rearden granted the request to extend the discovery schedule and ordered that a revised scheduling order would issue. She denied the request to serve the foreign nonparty by email, and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the two related docket entries.

The detailed version

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

Case
Burton v. America · No. 1:18-cv-02039
Judge
Rearden
Date
May 24, 2024

Background

The United States Attorney’s Office submitted a status letter on behalf of all parties. The case involves claims by the Estate of Franklin Sanchez and family members concerning Mr. Sanchez’s death while he was in custody at the Metropolitan Correctional Center. The United States is sued under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Anthony Bussanich, Robert Beaudouin, Ysmael Joaquin, Kimberly Shivers, Lorenzo Barazza, Gerald Castillo, Wilson Silva, Quentin Holzendorf, Terrence Thomas, Rosalind Silvia, and Shaadiq Shakir are sued in their individual capacities under Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents.

Discovery-Extension Request

The parties reported continuing efforts to complete discovery. The Government had deposed three plaintiffs and was considering whether to depose the administrator of Mr. Sanchez’s estate, Kenneth Mark Burton. Plaintiffs’ counsel had deposed two inmates and defendant Shaadiq Shakir and was coordinating additional inmate depositions. Plaintiffs’ counsel also sought to schedule a deposition of nonparty witness Alexandra Suero and had requested permission to serve her by email.

The parties jointly requested that the fact-discovery deadline be extended from June 14 to July 15, 2024. They also requested corresponding changes to the expert-discovery schedule: expert reports due August 14, rebuttal expert reports due September 11, expert depositions completed by October 11, and all discovery completed by October 18. The letter stated that plaintiffs consented to the requested changes.

Ruling

Judge Jennifer H. Rearden marked the request for the schedule extension “GRANTED” and stated that a revised scheduling order would issue.

The order separately states that the application for leave to serve a deposition subpoena by email on a nonparty foreign national located outside the United States, identified as ECF No. 136, is “DENIED.” The court relied on decisions stating that nonparty witnesses generally must be subpoenaed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 and that foreign nationals located outside the United States are beyond the subpoena power of U.S. courts, requiring use of the Hague Convention or another applicable treaty. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF Nos. 136 and 139.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.