Alheid v. Target Corp. et al
| Francine Alheid |
| Target Corp., Target USA Inc. and Target Brands Inc. |
| 1:2016cv06980 |
| September 7, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Bronx |
| Paul G. Gardephe |
| Henry B. Pitman |
| Other Personal Injury |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
19
OPINION AND ORDER: To the extent defendants suggest that they are entitled to take plaintiff's deposition before plaintiff deposes defendants, defendants' objection is frivolous. There is no priority of depositions in federal pract ice. Demarco v. Stony Brook Clinical Practice Mgm't Plan, CV-06-4305 (JG) (ARL), 2007 WL 1839823 at *1 (E.D.N.Y. June 26, 2007) (collecting authorities). Because it appears that plaintiff noticed defendants' deposition first, that depos ition should proceed first. Boxer v. Smith, Kline & French Labs., 43 F.R.D. 25, 27 & n.1 (S.D.N.Y. 1967) (Motley, D.J.). Accordingly, except with respect to over breadth and Topics 1, 20 and 21, defendants' objections to plaintiff& #039;s 30(b)(6) notice are overruled. Some of the topics in plaintiff's notice are plainly overly broad. For example, Topic 24 seeks a witness prepared with knowledge of "Defendant's Store Manager Training Policies for the five year period preceding Plaintiff's fall in the store." This topic appears to have little to do with determining whether there was an unreasonably dangerous condition in defendants' Mount Vernon store that was a proximate cause o f plaintiff's fall. Accordingly, the parties are directed to have a viva voce conversation, either in person or by telephone, in an effort to narrow the topics in dispute; an exchange of emails or other correspondence does not comp ly with this Order. If the parties are unable to resolve their disputes concerning the breadth of the topics, they are to report for a discovery conference on September 11, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 18A, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Str eet, New York, New York. No later than 5:00 p.m. on September 8, 2017, counsel are directed to send a fax to my chambers ((212) 805-6111) either advising that they have resolved their remaining disputes or identifying the deposition topics that remain in dispute. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 8/29/2017) Copies Transmitted by Chambers. (mro)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
