DIRECTIVE PROVIDED FOR A WAIVER OF DISCOVERY IF NOT TIMELY COMPLETED
After the plaintiff, C.K., sought a 30-day extension of time within which to file a “note of issue,” (a document indicating that the case was ready for trial), the New York County Supreme Court denied that request, and an appeal ensued.
On its review, the Appellate Division, First Department, noted that the motion court’s order had directed that discovery would be "automatically waived and precluded" if not completed by the timeframes set by that judge.
While plaintiff claimed that relief was needed because the parties had reached a “tentative settlement,” that wasn’t enough to sway the AD1, as the order in question clearly provided that the deadlines remained in place even in the event of “motion practice, settlement proceedings, or ADR.”
Given that unequivocal mandate, the AD1 unanimously affirmed the underlying determination, and left the outcome undisturbed.
Would you have taken issue with that?
# # #
DECISION