Freeman v. Giuliani
Freeman v. Giuliani
2023 WL 11926293 (D.D.C. 2023)
May 31, 2023
Howell, Beryl A., United States District Judge
Summary
The court has granted the defendant's motion for reconsideration and stayed his compliance with producing financial information. The court has also amended the scheduling order and directed the defendant to search and produce all relevant materials, except for two specific requests, by a certain date. The parties are also required to submit a joint status report on discovery compliance and any outstanding issues. The court has reserved ruling on the remaining relief requested by the plaintiffs, pending the parties' compliance with the directives outlined in the minute order.
Additional Decisions
Ruby FREEMAN, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Rudolph W. GIULIANI, Defendant
v.
Rudolph W. GIULIANI, Defendant
Civil Action No. 21-3354 (BAH)
United States District Court, District of Columbia
Signed May 31, 2023
Counsel
Aaron E. Nathan, Marie Annie Houghton-Larsen, Pro Hac Vice, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, New York, NY, Rachel Goodman, Pro Hac Vice, Protect Democracy, New York, NY, Brittany Marie Williams, Pro Hac Vice, Protect Democracy, Philadelphia, PA, Christine Kwon, Pro Hac Vice, John Langford, Pro Hac Vice, Protect Democracy, Los Angeles, CA, John Tyler Knoblett, Meryl Conant Governski, Timothy Ryan, Michael J. Gottlieb, Willkie Farr & Gallagher, LLP, Washington, DC, Sara Chimene-Weiss, Pro Hac Vice, Protect Democracy, Washington, DC, Von DuBose, Pro Hac Vice, DuBose Miller, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiffs.Joseph D. Sibley IV, Camara & Sibley LLP, Austin, TX, for Defendant.
Howell, Beryl A., United States District Judge
Opinion
*1 MINUTE ORDER (paperless): Upon consideration of defendant's 61 Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's May 19, 2023 Minute Order (“defendant's 61 Motion”) and defendant's 60 Declaration, STAYING defendant's compliance with paragraph 2 of the Courts May 19, 2023 Minute Order (“May 19 Order”), which required defendant to produce, by May 30, 2023, “full and complete responses to plaintiffs' requests for financial information in [Request for Production (“RFP”)] Nos. 40 and 41,” and AMENDING the SCHEDULING ORDER outlined in the May 19 Order as follows:
(1) By June 14, 2023, plaintiffs shall file any combined opposition to defendant's 61 Motion and any response regarding the sufficiency of defendant's 60 Declaration; and
(2) By June 21, 2023, defendant shall file any reply in support of his 61 Motion and response to plaintiffs' submission under paragraph 1, above; and
In light of defendant's representation that he has obtained adequate funds to “cure[ ] the arrearage with TrustPoint and the data is in the process of being unarchived” and that he is “preparing to search the TrustPoint database for all files during the relevant time frame beyond simply files with email extensions,” Def.'s 60 Declaration at 4-5, and finding that defendant's access to funds necessary to comply with his discovery obligations warrants further consideration of the relief requested in plaintiffs' 44 Motion to Compel Discovery, For Attorneys' Fees and Costs, and For Sanctions (“plaintiffs' 44 Motion”), for which ruling was reserved in part, pending assessment of defendant's financial information in response to RFP Nos. 40 and 41, further DIRECTING that:
(3) By June 16, 2023, defendant shall search and produce all materials responsive to plaintiffs' RFPs, with the exception of RFP Nos. 40 and 41, within the date ranges agreed to by the parties, with the assistance of a professional vendor, and produce a privilege log specifically tailored to the searches he has performed for materials responsive to plaintiffs' RFPs; and
(4) By June 30, 2023, the parties shall jointly submit a status report on discovery compliance and any outstanding issues.
The Court RESERVES ruling on the remainder of the relief requested in plaintiffs' 44 Motion, pending the parties' compliance with paragraphs (1) through (4), above.