From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lipsitz v. Harel

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jan 18, 2024
24 Civ. 146 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2024)

Opinion

24 Civ. 146 (AT)

01-18-2024

CHAIM LIPSITZ, Plaintiff, v. SHNEIOR HAREL and NATALIE ABALLI, Defendants.


ORDER

ANALISA TORRES, DISTRICT JUDGE

To protect the public health, while promoting the “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding,” Fed.R.Civ.P. 1, it is ORDERED pursuant to Rules 30(b)(3) and 30(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that all depositions in this action may be taken via telephone, videoconference, or other remote means. It is further ORDERED pursuant to Rule 30(b)(5) that a deposition will be deemed to have taken place “before an officer appointed or designated under Rule 28” if such officer attends the deposition using the same remote means used to comiect all other participants, so long as all participants (including the officer) can clearly hear and be heard by all other participants. The parties are encouraged to engage in discovery through remote means at every available opportunity.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lipsitz v. Harel

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jan 18, 2024
24 Civ. 146 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2024)
Case details for

Lipsitz v. Harel

Case Details

Full title:CHAIM LIPSITZ, Plaintiff, v. SHNEIOR HAREL and NATALIE ABALLI, Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jan 18, 2024

Citations

24 Civ. 146 (AT) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2024)