Local 3621, EMS Officers Union, DC-37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v. City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 31, 2025·No. 1:18-cv-04476·Unknown

Opinion

Dkt. No. 583. _ (on Me, fe leet et E. WILLIS ey wee Rese STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE yeas Oe 31, 2025 “ie” MURIEL GOODE-TRUFANT Bryan Carr Oler Corporation Counsel THE CiTy OF NEw YORK Assistant Corporation Counsel LAW DEPARTMENT Phone: (212) 356-2203 100 CHURCH STREET Femail pown@ □□□ NEW YORK, NY 10007

August 21, 2024 Via ECF Hon. Jennifer E. Willis United States Magistrate Judge United States District Court, Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: Local 3621, EMS Officers Union, DC-37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v. City of New York No. 18-cv-4476 (LJL) (JW) Dear Judge Willis: I write seeking relief from the Court’s Order dated May 31, 2023 (the “Order’’) (see ECF Dkt. 465) on the grounds that compliance with the Order will place an undue burden on the FDNY’s operations and is disproportionate to the needs of this case. Specifically, Defendants seek relief from that portion of the Order directing Defendants to produce documents responsive to Request No. 9 of Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Requests for Production dated March 3, 2023. Request No. 9 is as follows: For each EMS employee who has been active at any time from 1996 to present in the EMS positions at the rank of Lieutenant, Captain, Deputy Chief, or Division Commander, please produce copies of such employee’s annual performance evaluation for each year they worked in such positions. If any such employee did not receive an annual performance evaluation for any year or years, please identify by providing their name, the year such evaluation or evaluations were not completed and the reason such evaluation was not given. ECF Dkt. No. 459-1. The Court specified that Defendants “need only produce information going back to 2004.” ECF Dkt. 465, at 1. Notably, the Court gave Defendants leave to make this motion at the May 30, 2023 conference. See ECF Dkt. 466 at 67:24-68:5. Pursuant to Paragraph II.A of Your Honor’s Individual Practices and the Court’s Order dated July 31, 2024, see ECF Dkt. 571, the parties met and conferred several times

concerning production of EMS performance evaluations, most recently on August 13, 2024. For the reasons described herein, producing additional documents responsive to Request No. 9 is unduly burdensome and disproportionate to the needs of the case. A. Legal Standard Rule 26(b)(1) “require[s] that discovery be proportional to the needs of the case.” Robertson v. People Magazine, No. 14 Civ. 6759 (PAC), 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168525, at *4-5 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 16, 2015) (emphasis added). Rule 26 “is intended to encourage judges to be more aggressive in identifying and discouraging discovery overuse by emphasizing the need to analyze proportionality before ordering production of relevant information.” Morocho v. Stars Jewelry by the A Jeweler Corp., No. 23-CV-3836, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21653, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 7, 2024) (quotation omitted). The Court must, on motion or sua sponte, limit the frequency or extent based on the circumstances, including whether: “the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative … [or] the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties’ resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues.” Winfield v. City of New York, No. 15-cv-05236 (LTS) (KHP), 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22996, at *13 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2018) (quotation omitted). Importantly, this Court has broad authority to manage discovery, including to revisit its prior discovery decisions on motion or sua sponte. See Sea Trade Mar. Corp. v. Coutsodontis, No. 9-CV-488, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92725, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. May 27, 2020) (“It was well within [the Magistrate Judge's] authority to determine that additional discovery was unnecessary to ensure the fair and efficient resolution of [the] matter.”); Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., No. 02 Civ. 7618 (KMW) (HBP), 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55185 (S.D.N.Y. June 25, 2009) (“Plaintiffs do not state on what basis they request that the Court strike Defendants' second set of interrogatories, nor do Plaintiffs actually move the Court to strike these interrogatories. However, the Court can order the requested relief notwithstanding the fact that Plaintiffs did not so move. As discussed above, pursuant to Rule 26(b)(2)(C), a court must limit discovery sua sponte if the court determines that the discovery meets any of the Rule 26(b)(2)(C) criteria.”); Taveras v. Semple, No. 3:15-CV-531 (VAB), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112910, at *20 (D. Conn. June 27, 2020) (granting relief from discovery order upon motion by the defendants). B. Defendants’ Productions of Annual Performance Evaluations1 and Related Data First, Defendants have produced all evaluations submitted in support of applications for relevant promotion opportunities since 2004. It is FDNY’s practice to maintain documents related to promotion opportunities for the relevant ranks in paper files (“Promotion Files”) at FDNY headquarters. Pursuant to the Order and in response to Requests Nos. 2 and 11, see ECF Dkt. No. 459-1, Defendants have already produced all Promotion Files for promotion opportunities to the relevant ranks since 2004 that they were able to locate after a reasonable 1 Defendants differentiate between annual performance evaluations, which are considered as a part of applications for promotions, and non-annual performance evaluations, which generally are not. Non-annual performance evaluations are primarily those evaluations given to probationary employees who are ineligible for promotion due to their probationary status. search. Thus, Defendants have already produced all performance evaluations that have probative value and are relevant to Plaintiff’s claims. Defendants completed this production, which includes approximately 1,000 performance evaluations, in summer 2023. Second, Defendants have produced all electronically-stored evaluations for 2020, the year in which EMS began systematically digitizing evaluations. See Declaration of Corina Leske (“Leske Decl.”), ¶¶6-7. It was not EMS practice to maintain electronic files of evaluations prior to 2020, and thus there are no electronically stored evaluations from 2004 to 2019, see id. ¶¶8-11, with the exception of scattered “one-off” emails containing one or a small number of evaluations. Defendants redacted personal identifiable information contained in the 2020 evaluations prior to production, a step which took significant time. Defendants initially intended to similarly redact electronic evaluations from 2021 to 2023. However, in the interest of expediency, and in a good faith effort to complete discovery in this case, Defendants will produce the 2021 and 2023 evaluations in their unredacted form on or before August 26, 2024, pursuant to the protective order so-ordered by the Court on May 8, 2019. See ECF Dkt. 54. Third, Defendants have produced spreadsheets containing all annual evaluation scores for the years 2020 to 2023. EMS began systematically maintaining all EMS evaluation scores in spreadsheets in 2020. See Leske Decl. ¶ 6. Fourth, Defendants have produced data from a standalone legacy database, PerfEval, which contains incomplete EMS performance evaluation data from 2004 to 2019. Defendants estimate that PerfEval contains data for approximately 28,000 out of approximately 57,000 annual performance evaluations during that period. See id. ¶¶ 21-22. Accordingly, Defendants have already expended substantial time and resources to comply with Your Honor’s order. As set forth more fully below, the burden of further efforts would indisputably outweigh any value that these materials have to this case because the materials have no probative value and their production is extremely burdensome. C. Producing Additional Evaluations is Unduly Burdensome and Disproportionate to the Needs of the Case Given the Evaluations’ Minimal Pr

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Local 3621, EMS Officers Union, DC-37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v. City of New York, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Local 3621, EMS Officers Union, DC-37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v. City of New York (Local 3621, EMS Officers Union, DC-37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related