Phillip Taylor, Sr. v. Yesenia Rengel, Kenny Ortiz, NYC Health & Hospitals, and Jacobi Kirk Robinson

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: October 7, 2025
• Docket: 1:23-cv-10324
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------X PHILLIP TAYLOR, SR., : : 23-CV-10324 (JHR) (RWL) Plaintiff, : : - against - : ORDER : YESENIA RENGEL, KENNY ORTIZ, : NYC HEALTH & HOSPITALS, and : JACOBI KIRK ROBINSON, : : Defendants. : ---------------------------------------------------------------X ROBERT W. LEHRBURGER, United States Magistrate Judge. This order addresses Plaintiff’s requests for relief in his letter of September 30, 2025, at Dkt. 75. 1. Plaintiff’s request for discovery sanctions is denied. Plaintiff has not identified any discovery that is outstanding and that was required to be produced but was not. In any event, discovery is closed. 2. Plaintiff’s application with respect to the declaration of opining expert Dr. Silberman is granted in part. By October 14, 2025, Defendants shall file either (A) a supplement to Dr. Silberman’s declaration, providing the information required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) items iv-vi; or (B) a letter identifying where in Defendants’ motion papers that information is provided; or (C) an explanation of why Dr. Silberman’s declaration, which is in substance an expert report, may be considered in the absence of that information. 3. Plaintiff’s application for appointment of an expert witness for which Defendants would be required to share the cost is denied without prejudice. The decision whether to appoint an expert is committed to the sound discretion of the court. Azkour v. Little Rest Twelve, Inc., 645 Fed. Appx. 98, 102 (2d Cir. 2016). Federal Rule of Evidence 706 permits a court to appoint an expert witness, but not as a partisan for one party or another. Brown v. Dirga, No.3:15CV01086, 2016 WL 2743486, at *2 (D. Conn. May 11, 2016). Appointment of an expert pursuant to Rule 706 “should be used sparingly,” used “relatively infrequently,” and is considered by “most judges” “as an extraordinary activity that is appropriate in only rare instances.” Hill v. Payne, No. 18-CV- 6022, 2023 WL 2342892, at *2 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 3, 2023) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Inasmuch as summary judgment will be decided based on whether there are genuinely disputed material facts, the Court finds that the circumstances do not warrant appointment of an expert at this time. Should the Court later determine appointment would be appropriate, it may do so at that time. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the letter motion at Dkt. 75.

SO ORDERED. jo UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Dated: October 7, 2025 New York, New York Copies transmitted this date to all counsel of record. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff at the address below and note service on the docket. Phillip Taylor, Sr. 1458 Jesup Ave. #5 Bronx, NY 10452