From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jallali v. Duncan

United States District Court, S.D. Florida
Nov 9, 2010
Case No. 10-60189-CIV-SEITZ/O'SULLIVAN (S.D. Fla. Nov. 9, 2010)

Opinion

Case No. 10-60189-CIV-SEITZ/O'SULLIVAN.

November 9, 2010


ORDER


THIS MATTER came before the Court on the Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Quash, and/or Motion to Stay Discovery (DE# 38, 10/22/10) filed by non-parties Ray Ferrero Jr. and Anthony Silvagni.

The plaintiff in this case sued Arne Duncan and the United States Department of Education (DOE). The complaint alleges four causes of action: 1) declaratory relief; 2) review of agency action; 3) implied right of review of agency action; and 4) mandamus to compel. The plaintiff seeks to depose Ray Ferrero, Jr., the present Chancellor and former President of Nova Southeastern University (NSU), and Anthony Silvagni, the Dean of the College of Osteopathic Medicine at NSU. All of the aforementioned causes of action relate to the plaintiff's claim that it was the duty of the DOE to either take action or investigate regarding the requests made by the plaintiff in his administrative complaint.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) provides in part the following:

(b) Discovery Scope and Limits.
(1) Scope in General.
Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) (Emphasis added).

The four causes of action alleged by the plaintiff do not require any proof of any actions, knowledge, or conduct by Ray Ferrero, Jr., or Anthony Silvagni. Ray Ferrero, Jr., and Anthony Silvagni do not have any knowledge as to whether it was the duty of the DOE to either take action or investigate the complaints made by the plaintiff. The depositions of Ray Ferrero, Jr., and Anthony Silvagni are not relevant to the claims in this case. Accordingly, having reviewed the applicable filings and law, and having held a hearing in this matter, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion for Protective Order and the Motion to Quash contained in the Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Quash, and/or Motion to Stay Discovery (DE# 38, 10/22/10) are GRANTED. The Motion to Stay Discovery is DENIED as moot.

DONE AND ORDERED, in Chambers, at Miami, Florida this 9th day of November, 2010.


Summaries of

Jallali v. Duncan

United States District Court, S.D. Florida
Nov 9, 2010
Case No. 10-60189-CIV-SEITZ/O'SULLIVAN (S.D. Fla. Nov. 9, 2010)
Case details for

Jallali v. Duncan

Case Details

Full title:DR. MASSOOD JALLALI, Plaintiff, v. ARNE DUNCAN, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Florida

Date published: Nov 9, 2010

Citations

Case No. 10-60189-CIV-SEITZ/O'SULLIVAN (S.D. Fla. Nov. 9, 2010)