Prince Andrew Order 123121
Prince Andrew Order 123121
Prince Andrew Order 123121
Plaintiff,
Defendant.
X
ORDER
Defendant moves for an order compelling plaintiffto respond t targeted" but as yet unspecified "written
o
discovery requests pertaining to her domicile," requiring her "to submit to a two-hour remote deposition limited to the issue
of her domicile," and staying all other discovery until the Court determines whether subject matter exists, lack of which
wouid be a potential defense that the defendant refers to as "anticipated" and that he concededly has not actually raised.
The motion (Dkt 58) is denied, substantially for the reasons set forth in the plaintiff's opposition to
defendant's motion. Among other relevant points, it appears that the defendant previously served on the plaintiffextensive
discovery, including at least one comprehensive request for documents relating to her domicile, to which responses are due,
This ruling is without prejudice to any defense of lack of subjec matter jurisdiction that defendant may
t
motion or by answer. likewise is made without determining the merit, or lack of merit, in
It
raise by
plaintiff's assertion that defendant's motion is "a transparent attempt to delay discovery into his own
SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 31, 2021
Lewis A. Kaplan
United States District Judge