Preview
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
EXHIBIT D
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
HADAS GOLDFARB, Index No. 510225/17
Plaintiff, THE HOSPITAL'S
RESPONSES AND
vs. OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S
FIRST REQUEST
FOR PRODUCTION OF
THE NEW YORK AND PRESBYTERIAN DOCUMENTS
HOSPITAL and CITY OF NEW YORK,
Defendants.
Pursuant to Article 31 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules
("Defendant"
("CPLR"), Defendant The New York and Presbyterian Hospital or
"Hospital"), through its attorneys Epstein Becker & Green, P.C., hereby responds and
objects to Plaintiff's First Request For Production of Documents ("Requests").
RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
1. The objections and responses herein are provided subject to and with the
reservation of the Hospital's right to object to the admission into evidence of the
documents produced in response to the Requests on the grounds of competency,
privilege, relevancy, materiality, or any other proper ground, in whole or in part, in any
subsequent step of this action or in any other action.
2. By its responses to the Requests, the Hospital does not intend to and does
not waive, but expressly preserves, its attorney-client privilege and all other privileges
and protections from disclosure, including protections afforded by the work-product
doctrine.
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
3. In responding to the Requests, the Hospital has endeavored to ensure the
accuracy of the placement of a particular document into a given category; however, the
groupings have been made without prejudice and are not to be deemed exclusive.
4. The Hospital's search for responsive documents is continuing, and the
Hospital expressly reserves its right to supplement, modify or amend these responses as
needed based upon its continuing search for responsive information.
5. In responding to the Requests, the Hospital has not made any kind of
electronic document search and will not do so until the parties meet and confer over the
appropriate scope of such search.
Complaint"
6. As used herein, "Amended shall mean the Amended
Complaint filed by the Plaintiff in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of New York in the action Hadas Goldfarb v. The New York and Presbyterian
Hospital, and City of New York, Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-o3513-ILG-PK, which, by Order
dated September 1, 2017, was remanded to the Supreme Court of the State of the New
York, County of Kings, and now bears Index No. 510225/2017.
7. Unless otherwise stated, the relevant time period for the Hospital's
responses to the Requests is from March 24, 2015 to December 14, 2015. Unless
otherwise noted, The Hospital will not produce documents outside of this time period.
GENERAL OBJECTIONS
1. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent that they are vague,
ambiguous, overbroad, not sufficiently limited in time, burdensome, oppressive, or call
for information or for the production of documents which are not relevant to the subject
2
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
matter of the litigation or reasonably likely to lead to discovery of relevant or admissible
evidence.
2. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent that they are vague,
ambiguous, or undefined. For example, Plaintiff uses the references "FDNY EMS OGP
2100-o7" 3.1"
and "Rule repeatedly without defining them. The Hospital infers that
2100-07"
"FDNY EMS OGP is meant to refer to FDNY's EMS OGP 200-o7, "Voluntary
Uniforms,"
Hospital Ambulance Personnel Section 3.1 because there have been no
allegations or claims in this action to date regarding FDNY EMS OGP 2100-o7 and
3.1"
responds accordingly. Additionally, the Hospital infers that "Rule refers to FDNY's
Uniforms,"
EMS OGP 200-o7, "Voluntary Hospital Ambulance Personnel Section 3.1
and responds accordingly.
3. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent that Plaintiff's repeated
documents"
demand for production of "all within broadly defined categories renders the
improper."
Requests "palpably City ofNew York v.M.PaulFriedberg and Assocs., 404
N.Y.S.2d 868, 870 (1st Dep't 1978); see also Benzenberg v. Telecom Plus of Upstate
New York,Inc., 501 N.Y.S.2d 131. 132 (2d Dep't 1986) ("It is well settled that the use of
documents'
the description 'all within broad categories, which was used in the instant
case, renders the notice improper.")
4. The Hospital objects to the Requests on the ground that they are
duplicative or overlapping. Hence, information responsive to one Request may also be
responsive to several others, making such responses unduly burdensome and
oppressive.
3
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
5. The Hospital objects to the assumption of any underlying fact or legal
conclusion contained in the Requests which may be in dispute. No response contained
herein shall be deemed a concession of any such fact or legal conclusion by the Hospital.
6. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they impose on the
Hospital obligations in excess of, or inconsistent with, the CPLR. The Hospital will
respond to the Requests in accordance with the CPLR and will not respond to the extent
the Requests exceed the requirements of the CPLR.
"Definitions" "Instructions"
7. The Hospital objects to the and included with
the Requests to the extent they impose on the Hospital obligations in excess of, or
inconsistent with, the CPLR. The Hospital will respond to the Requests in accordance
with the CPLR and will not respond to the extent the Requests exceed the requirements
of the CPLR.
"Definitions"
8. The Hospital objects to number 10 in the because it defines
"possession"
in relation to documents as "documents that are in the possession, custody
...."
or control of Defendant City If Plaintiff wishes to obtain documents in the
possession of the City of New York, itwill need to serve discovery requests on the City of
New York.
9. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they seek documents or
information which is in the Plaintiff's possession, is available to Plaintiff from a more
convenient, less burdensome source and/or are in the possession of individuals and/or
entities over which the Hospital has no control.
10. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they seek materials
protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work-product
doctrine or any other recognized privilege against disclosure.
4
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
11. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they call for production
of documents or material which may not be disclosed without authorization, or are
privileged from disclosure, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act, under a Doctor/Patient Privilege, Peer-Review Privilege, or under any other
patient-related privacy laws, doctrines or privileges recognized by law, including the
CPLR. The Hospital does not waive, and hereby preserves, all such privileges and
privacy protections.
12. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they seek proprietary
business information or other confidential information.
13. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they seek information
about current or former employees of the Hospital who are not Plaintiff, including but
not limited to, individuals such as Michael Koppel.
14. The Hospital objects to the Requests on the ground that they contain
words or phrases susceptible to various and conflicting interpretations. Consequently,
responses to some of the Requests call for speculation on the part of the Hospital. The
Hospital will respond to any ambiguous document request based upon its reasonable
interpretation of the particular document request.
15. Where the Hospital agrees to produce a document, unless a copy of such
document is enclosed herewith, responsive documents will be made available for
inspection and copying, on a mutually agreeable date, at the office of its attorneys,
Epstein, Becker & Green, P.C., 250 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10177.
16. Neither the Hospital's agreement to produce, nor its objection to the
production of, any document or any category of documents is to be construed as an
5
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
admission that any particular document or documents exist within such category or
categories.
17. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, all of which are
incorporated by reference into each and every response below, the Hospital responds as
follows:
RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS
Request No. 1:
All documents reflecting intra-office correspondence and e-mails concerning any
of the allegations in the Amended Complaint.
Response to Request No. 1:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 1 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"all"
scope as it requests documents and to the extent it seeks documents protected by
the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product. Subject to and without
waiver of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce
responsive, non-privileged intra-office documents and e-mails regarding Plaintiff's
allegations in the Amended Complaint that are located after a reasonable search. (See
NYP - NYP
generally 0045 o084)
Request No. 2:
All documents reflecting correspondence, e-mails, or other written
communications concerning Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, any and all
correspondence, e-mails, text messages, chats, or other written communications
between any representatives of Defendant Hospital.
Response to Request No. 2:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 2 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"all"
scope as it seeks documents, it is duplicative of Request No. 1, and to the extent it
seeks documents protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work
6
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
product. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General
Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged emails and written
communications between Hospital employees regarding Plaintiff that are located after a
reasonable search. (NYP - NYP
0045 0084)
Request No. 3:
Complete copies of any non-discrimination policy promulgated or distributed by
Defendant Hospital.
Response to Request No. 3:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 3 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"any" non-
scope as it seeks documents and overly broad in time as it seeks
discrimination policies that were in place at the Hospital before and after the limited
relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015. Subject to and
without waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital will
produce relevant equal employment opportunity and non-discrimination policies. (NYP
- NYP NYP - NYP
0193 o201, 0204 o308)
Request No. 4:
Any documents which reflect the procedures of Defendant Hospital when an
employee requests either a religious or medical accommodation.
Response to Request No. 4:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 4 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
time as it seeks documents that were in place at the Hospital before and after the limited
relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015, and it seeks
documents that are neither relevant nor likely to lead to the discovery of relevant
evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General
Objections, the Hospital states that it will produce its policies regarding requesting an
7
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
accommodation for reasons to one's religion or disabilities. (NYP 0196 - NYP
relating
o201)
Request No. 5:
Any documents which reflect the procedures of Defendant Hospital when
terminating an employee.
Response to Request No. 5:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 5 on the grounds that itis overly broad as to
time as it seeks documents that were in place at the Hospital before and after the limited
relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015, and it seeks
documents that are neither relevant nor likely to lead to the discovery of relevant
evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General
Objections, the Hospital states that it will produce its Employee Handbook, its Code of
Conduct, its Department of Emergency Medical Services Policy and Procedure Manual,
its Human Resources Policy and Procedure Manual Number 511 titled
Resignation/Termination, its Human Resources Policy and Procedure Manual Number
403 titled Orientation Period of Employment, and its Human Resources Policy and
Procedure Manual Number titled Rules of Conduct. (See NYP o202 -
409 generally
NYP o308)
Request No. 6:
Any documents which reflect the policy of Defendant Hospital in regard to paying
new employees for their time spent at orientation.
Response to Request No. 6:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 6 on the grounds that itis overly broad as to
time as itseeks documents that were in place at the Hospital before and after the limited
relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015, and it seeks
8
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
documents that are neither relevant nor likely to lead to the discovery of relevant
evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General
Objections, the Hospital states that no responsive documents have been located.
Request No. 7:
All documents or communications relating to Plaintiff.
Response to Request No. 7:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 7 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"all"
scope as it seeks documents or communications, it is duplicative of Request Nos. 1
and 2, and to the extent it seeks documents protected by the attorney-client privilege
and/or attorney work product. Subject to and without waiver of these specific
objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged
documents or communications regarding Plaintiff located after a reasonable search.
(NYP o001 - NYP NYP NYP o308 - NYP
o084, o287, o327)
Request No. 8:
All documents that constitute, reference, or incorporate the contract between
Defendant City and Defendant Hospital.
Response to Request No. 8:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 8 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"all" contract,"
scope as itseeks documents "that constitute, reference or incorporate the
is vague and ambiguous as the phrase "contract between Defendant City and Defendant
Hospital"
is undefined and seeks documents that are neither relevant nor reasonably
likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of
these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce the 911
Ambulance Agreements between defendant City of New York (the "City") and the
Hospital that were in place in and 2015. (NYP - NYP
2014 o333 o423)
9
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
Request No. 9:
All documents or communication that reflect, refer to, or are related to employees
requesting an accommodation regarding FDNY EMS OGP 2100-o7.
Response to Request No. 9:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 9 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"all"
scope as itseeks documents or communications "that reflect, refer to, or are related
..."
to requests for accommodations, to the extent it seeks documents that are protected
by the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product doctrine, to the extent it
seeks documents regarding confidential or personal medical information of other
Hospital employees, and seeks documents that are neither relevant nor reasonably
likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of
these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital will produce
responsive, non-privileged documents regarding Plaintiffs request for an
accommodation. (See NYP o046 - NYP
generally 0084)
Request No. 10:
All documents or communications relating to requests for religious
accommodations from employees.
Response to Request No. 10:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 10 on the grounds that itis overly broad in
communications"
scope as it seeks "all documents or regarding requests for religious
accommodations from any Hospital employee, is overly broad in time as it seeks
documents prior to and after the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through
December 14, 2015, it seeks documents that are neither relevant nor likely to lead to the
discovery of relevant evidence, and to the extent it seeks documents protected by the
attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without
10
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital will produce
responsive, non-privileged documents regarding requests for religious accommodations
made by employees of the Hospital's Department of Emergency Medical Services (the
"EMS Department"). (See NYP oo46 - NYP
generally 0084)
Request No. 11:
documents or communications to Rule 3.1 of FDNY EMS OGP 2100-
Any relating
07.
Response to Request No. 11:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 11 on the grounds that itis overly broad in
"any"
scope as it seeks documents or communications, overly broad in time as it seeks
documents outside of the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14,
2015, to the extent itseeks documents that are protected by the attorney-client privilege
and/or attorney work product doctrine, and seeks documents that are neither relevant
nor reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and
without waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital will
produce responsive, non-privileged documents regarding EMSC OGP 200-o7 Section
3.1. (See NYP oo46 - NYP
generally 0084)
Request No. 12:
All documents which are related to the safety of wearing a skirt while working as
an EMT or paramedic.
Response to Request No. 12:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 12 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
documents"
scope as it seeks "all and, is overly broad in drafted, in that itis not limited
to working as an EMT or paramedic for the Hospital, and is overly broad in time as it
seeks documents beyond the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December
11
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
14, 2015. Subject to and without waiver of these objections, the Hospital shall produce
non-privileged documents. (See NYP 0046 - NYP NYP
responsive, generally 0084,
O212 -
0220)
Request No. 13:
All documents which refer to relate to the consequences that would result from
Defendant Hospital failing to enforce Rule 3.1.
Response to Request No. 13:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 13 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"all"
scope as it seeks documents and is overly broad in time as it seeks documents
beyond the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015. Subject
to and without waiver of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital
will produce non-privileged documents. (NYP - NYP
responsive, 0333 o423)
Request No. 14:
Any documents pertaining to the dress code of Defendant Hospital employees.
Response to Request No. 14:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 14 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"any"
scope as it seeks documents and is not limited to the dress code for Hospital
employees in the EMS Department, who by the very nature of their jobs have their own
dress code requirements; and is overly broad in time as it is not limited to the relevant
time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015. Subject to and without
waiver of these objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged
documents regarding the dress code for Hospital employees in the EMS Department.
(NYP NYP 0212 - NYP
o051, o220)
Request No. 15:
12
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
Any documents relating to an Organization Chart of the Defendant Hospital as it
pertains to its EMS operations.
Response to Request No. 15:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 15 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
time as itis not limited to the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December
operations"
14, 2015, is vague and ambiguous as the phrase "EMS is undefined, and
seeks information that is neither relevant nor likely to lead to the production of relevant
evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General
operations"
Objections, and assuming that by "EMS Plaintiff meant the EMS
Department, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents. (NYP
o328 - NYP o332)
Request No. 16:
Any documents relating to complaints made to the EEOC regarding religious
discrimination/failure to accommodate from Defendant Hospital's employees.
Response to Request No. 16:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 16 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
time as it seeks documents beyond the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through
December and to the extent it seeks documents protected the attorney-
14, 2015, by
client privilege and/or attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiver of
these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive,
non-privileged documents relating to complaints made to the EEOC regarding religious
discrimination/failure to accommodate made by employees in the Hospital's EMS
Department. (NYP - NYP
o309 o327)
Request No. 17:
All other documents or communications supporting or contradicting Plaintiff's
allegations against Defendant Hospital or in any other way reflecting, relating to, or
13
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
referring to the facts alleged in the Amended Complaint which have not been disclosed
in response to any of the foregoing document requests.
Response to Request No. 17:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 17 on the ground that it is overly broad in
communications"
scope as it seeks "all other documents or having any relevance to the
allegations in the Amended Complaint. Subject to and without waiving this specific
objection and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged
documents. (See NYP 0001 - NYP
generally o427)
Request No. 18:
Please produce all documents you were requested to identify in plaintiffs first set
of interrogatories to you in this action, or relating to or otherwise supporting your
response to any interrogatory.
Response to Request No. 18:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 18 on the ground that it is overly broad in
documents."
scope as it seeks "all Subject to and without waiving this specific objection
and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged
documents. (See NYP o001 - NYP
generally o427)
Request No. 19:
All documents relating to Plaintiff's damages including any documents
supporting any contention that Plaintiff is not entitled to all or part of the damages
claimed.
Response to Request No. 19:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 19 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"all"
scope as it seeks documents and to the extent itseeks the production of documents
not within the Hospital's possession, custody or control as only Plaintiff would have
documents regarding her efforts to mitigate her damages. Subject to and without waiver
14
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018
of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce
documents Plaintiffs rate of pay. (NYP co41 - NYP
regarding hourly o42)
Request No. 20:
Please produce all documents used in responding to the Amended Complaint.
Response to Request No. 20:
The Hospital objects to Request No. 20 on the grounds that it is overly broad in
"all"
scope as it seeks documents and seeks documents that will reveal attorney-client
privileged communications and attorney work p
Preview
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 EXHIBIT D FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS HADAS GOLDFARB, Index No. 510225/17 Plaintiff, THE HOSPITAL'S RESPONSES AND vs. OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF THE NEW YORK AND PRESBYTERIAN DOCUMENTS HOSPITAL and CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendants. Pursuant to Article 31 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules ("Defendant" ("CPLR"), Defendant The New York and Presbyterian Hospital or "Hospital"), through its attorneys Epstein Becker & Green, P.C., hereby responds and objects to Plaintiff's First Request For Production of Documents ("Requests"). RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 1. The objections and responses herein are provided subject to and with the reservation of the Hospital's right to object to the admission into evidence of the documents produced in response to the Requests on the grounds of competency, privilege, relevancy, materiality, or any other proper ground, in whole or in part, in any subsequent step of this action or in any other action. 2. By its responses to the Requests, the Hospital does not intend to and does not waive, but expressly preserves, its attorney-client privilege and all other privileges and protections from disclosure, including protections afforded by the work-product doctrine. FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 3. In responding to the Requests, the Hospital has endeavored to ensure the accuracy of the placement of a particular document into a given category; however, the groupings have been made without prejudice and are not to be deemed exclusive. 4. The Hospital's search for responsive documents is continuing, and the Hospital expressly reserves its right to supplement, modify or amend these responses as needed based upon its continuing search for responsive information. 5. In responding to the Requests, the Hospital has not made any kind of electronic document search and will not do so until the parties meet and confer over the appropriate scope of such search. Complaint" 6. As used herein, "Amended shall mean the Amended Complaint filed by the Plaintiff in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York in the action Hadas Goldfarb v. The New York and Presbyterian Hospital, and City of New York, Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-o3513-ILG-PK, which, by Order dated September 1, 2017, was remanded to the Supreme Court of the State of the New York, County of Kings, and now bears Index No. 510225/2017. 7. Unless otherwise stated, the relevant time period for the Hospital's responses to the Requests is from March 24, 2015 to December 14, 2015. Unless otherwise noted, The Hospital will not produce documents outside of this time period. GENERAL OBJECTIONS 1. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent that they are vague, ambiguous, overbroad, not sufficiently limited in time, burdensome, oppressive, or call for information or for the production of documents which are not relevant to the subject 2 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 matter of the litigation or reasonably likely to lead to discovery of relevant or admissible evidence. 2. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent that they are vague, ambiguous, or undefined. For example, Plaintiff uses the references "FDNY EMS OGP 2100-o7" 3.1" and "Rule repeatedly without defining them. The Hospital infers that 2100-07" "FDNY EMS OGP is meant to refer to FDNY's EMS OGP 200-o7, "Voluntary Uniforms," Hospital Ambulance Personnel Section 3.1 because there have been no allegations or claims in this action to date regarding FDNY EMS OGP 2100-o7 and 3.1" responds accordingly. Additionally, the Hospital infers that "Rule refers to FDNY's Uniforms," EMS OGP 200-o7, "Voluntary Hospital Ambulance Personnel Section 3.1 and responds accordingly. 3. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent that Plaintiff's repeated documents" demand for production of "all within broadly defined categories renders the improper." Requests "palpably City ofNew York v.M.PaulFriedberg and Assocs., 404 N.Y.S.2d 868, 870 (1st Dep't 1978); see also Benzenberg v. Telecom Plus of Upstate New York,Inc., 501 N.Y.S.2d 131. 132 (2d Dep't 1986) ("It is well settled that the use of documents' the description 'all within broad categories, which was used in the instant case, renders the notice improper.") 4. The Hospital objects to the Requests on the ground that they are duplicative or overlapping. Hence, information responsive to one Request may also be responsive to several others, making such responses unduly burdensome and oppressive. 3 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 5. The Hospital objects to the assumption of any underlying fact or legal conclusion contained in the Requests which may be in dispute. No response contained herein shall be deemed a concession of any such fact or legal conclusion by the Hospital. 6. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they impose on the Hospital obligations in excess of, or inconsistent with, the CPLR. The Hospital will respond to the Requests in accordance with the CPLR and will not respond to the extent the Requests exceed the requirements of the CPLR. "Definitions" "Instructions" 7. The Hospital objects to the and included with the Requests to the extent they impose on the Hospital obligations in excess of, or inconsistent with, the CPLR. The Hospital will respond to the Requests in accordance with the CPLR and will not respond to the extent the Requests exceed the requirements of the CPLR. "Definitions" 8. The Hospital objects to number 10 in the because it defines "possession" in relation to documents as "documents that are in the possession, custody ...." or control of Defendant City If Plaintiff wishes to obtain documents in the possession of the City of New York, itwill need to serve discovery requests on the City of New York. 9. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they seek documents or information which is in the Plaintiff's possession, is available to Plaintiff from a more convenient, less burdensome source and/or are in the possession of individuals and/or entities over which the Hospital has no control. 10. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they seek materials protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work-product doctrine or any other recognized privilege against disclosure. 4 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 11. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they call for production of documents or material which may not be disclosed without authorization, or are privileged from disclosure, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, under a Doctor/Patient Privilege, Peer-Review Privilege, or under any other patient-related privacy laws, doctrines or privileges recognized by law, including the CPLR. The Hospital does not waive, and hereby preserves, all such privileges and privacy protections. 12. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they seek proprietary business information or other confidential information. 13. The Hospital objects to the Requests to the extent they seek information about current or former employees of the Hospital who are not Plaintiff, including but not limited to, individuals such as Michael Koppel. 14. The Hospital objects to the Requests on the ground that they contain words or phrases susceptible to various and conflicting interpretations. Consequently, responses to some of the Requests call for speculation on the part of the Hospital. The Hospital will respond to any ambiguous document request based upon its reasonable interpretation of the particular document request. 15. Where the Hospital agrees to produce a document, unless a copy of such document is enclosed herewith, responsive documents will be made available for inspection and copying, on a mutually agreeable date, at the office of its attorneys, Epstein, Becker & Green, P.C., 250 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10177. 16. Neither the Hospital's agreement to produce, nor its objection to the production of, any document or any category of documents is to be construed as an 5 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 admission that any particular document or documents exist within such category or categories. 17. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, all of which are incorporated by reference into each and every response below, the Hospital responds as follows: RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS Request No. 1: All documents reflecting intra-office correspondence and e-mails concerning any of the allegations in the Amended Complaint. Response to Request No. 1: The Hospital objects to Request No. 1 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "all" scope as it requests documents and to the extent it seeks documents protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged intra-office documents and e-mails regarding Plaintiff's allegations in the Amended Complaint that are located after a reasonable search. (See NYP - NYP generally 0045 o084) Request No. 2: All documents reflecting correspondence, e-mails, or other written communications concerning Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, any and all correspondence, e-mails, text messages, chats, or other written communications between any representatives of Defendant Hospital. Response to Request No. 2: The Hospital objects to Request No. 2 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "all" scope as it seeks documents, it is duplicative of Request No. 1, and to the extent it seeks documents protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work 6 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 product. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged emails and written communications between Hospital employees regarding Plaintiff that are located after a reasonable search. (NYP - NYP 0045 0084) Request No. 3: Complete copies of any non-discrimination policy promulgated or distributed by Defendant Hospital. Response to Request No. 3: The Hospital objects to Request No. 3 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "any" non- scope as it seeks documents and overly broad in time as it seeks discrimination policies that were in place at the Hospital before and after the limited relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital will produce relevant equal employment opportunity and non-discrimination policies. (NYP - NYP NYP - NYP 0193 o201, 0204 o308) Request No. 4: Any documents which reflect the procedures of Defendant Hospital when an employee requests either a religious or medical accommodation. Response to Request No. 4: The Hospital objects to Request No. 4 on the grounds that it is overly broad in time as it seeks documents that were in place at the Hospital before and after the limited relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015, and it seeks documents that are neither relevant nor likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital states that it will produce its policies regarding requesting an 7 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 accommodation for reasons to one's religion or disabilities. (NYP 0196 - NYP relating o201) Request No. 5: Any documents which reflect the procedures of Defendant Hospital when terminating an employee. Response to Request No. 5: The Hospital objects to Request No. 5 on the grounds that itis overly broad as to time as it seeks documents that were in place at the Hospital before and after the limited relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015, and it seeks documents that are neither relevant nor likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital states that it will produce its Employee Handbook, its Code of Conduct, its Department of Emergency Medical Services Policy and Procedure Manual, its Human Resources Policy and Procedure Manual Number 511 titled Resignation/Termination, its Human Resources Policy and Procedure Manual Number 403 titled Orientation Period of Employment, and its Human Resources Policy and Procedure Manual Number titled Rules of Conduct. (See NYP o202 - 409 generally NYP o308) Request No. 6: Any documents which reflect the policy of Defendant Hospital in regard to paying new employees for their time spent at orientation. Response to Request No. 6: The Hospital objects to Request No. 6 on the grounds that itis overly broad as to time as itseeks documents that were in place at the Hospital before and after the limited relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015, and it seeks 8 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 documents that are neither relevant nor likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital states that no responsive documents have been located. Request No. 7: All documents or communications relating to Plaintiff. Response to Request No. 7: The Hospital objects to Request No. 7 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "all" scope as it seeks documents or communications, it is duplicative of Request Nos. 1 and 2, and to the extent it seeks documents protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents or communications regarding Plaintiff located after a reasonable search. (NYP o001 - NYP NYP NYP o308 - NYP o084, o287, o327) Request No. 8: All documents that constitute, reference, or incorporate the contract between Defendant City and Defendant Hospital. Response to Request No. 8: The Hospital objects to Request No. 8 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "all" contract," scope as itseeks documents "that constitute, reference or incorporate the is vague and ambiguous as the phrase "contract between Defendant City and Defendant Hospital" is undefined and seeks documents that are neither relevant nor reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce the 911 Ambulance Agreements between defendant City of New York (the "City") and the Hospital that were in place in and 2015. (NYP - NYP 2014 o333 o423) 9 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 Request No. 9: All documents or communication that reflect, refer to, or are related to employees requesting an accommodation regarding FDNY EMS OGP 2100-o7. Response to Request No. 9: The Hospital objects to Request No. 9 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "all" scope as itseeks documents or communications "that reflect, refer to, or are related ..." to requests for accommodations, to the extent it seeks documents that are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product doctrine, to the extent it seeks documents regarding confidential or personal medical information of other Hospital employees, and seeks documents that are neither relevant nor reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents regarding Plaintiffs request for an accommodation. (See NYP o046 - NYP generally 0084) Request No. 10: All documents or communications relating to requests for religious accommodations from employees. Response to Request No. 10: The Hospital objects to Request No. 10 on the grounds that itis overly broad in communications" scope as it seeks "all documents or regarding requests for religious accommodations from any Hospital employee, is overly broad in time as it seeks documents prior to and after the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015, it seeks documents that are neither relevant nor likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence, and to the extent it seeks documents protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without 10 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents regarding requests for religious accommodations made by employees of the Hospital's Department of Emergency Medical Services (the "EMS Department"). (See NYP oo46 - NYP generally 0084) Request No. 11: documents or communications to Rule 3.1 of FDNY EMS OGP 2100- Any relating 07. Response to Request No. 11: The Hospital objects to Request No. 11 on the grounds that itis overly broad in "any" scope as it seeks documents or communications, overly broad in time as it seeks documents outside of the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015, to the extent itseeks documents that are protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product doctrine, and seeks documents that are neither relevant nor reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and the General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents regarding EMSC OGP 200-o7 Section 3.1. (See NYP oo46 - NYP generally 0084) Request No. 12: All documents which are related to the safety of wearing a skirt while working as an EMT or paramedic. Response to Request No. 12: The Hospital objects to Request No. 12 on the grounds that it is overly broad in documents" scope as it seeks "all and, is overly broad in drafted, in that itis not limited to working as an EMT or paramedic for the Hospital, and is overly broad in time as it seeks documents beyond the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 11 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 14, 2015. Subject to and without waiver of these objections, the Hospital shall produce non-privileged documents. (See NYP 0046 - NYP NYP responsive, generally 0084, O212 - 0220) Request No. 13: All documents which refer to relate to the consequences that would result from Defendant Hospital failing to enforce Rule 3.1. Response to Request No. 13: The Hospital objects to Request No. 13 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "all" scope as it seeks documents and is overly broad in time as it seeks documents beyond the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce non-privileged documents. (NYP - NYP responsive, 0333 o423) Request No. 14: Any documents pertaining to the dress code of Defendant Hospital employees. Response to Request No. 14: The Hospital objects to Request No. 14 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "any" scope as it seeks documents and is not limited to the dress code for Hospital employees in the EMS Department, who by the very nature of their jobs have their own dress code requirements; and is overly broad in time as it is not limited to the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December 14, 2015. Subject to and without waiver of these objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents regarding the dress code for Hospital employees in the EMS Department. (NYP NYP 0212 - NYP o051, o220) Request No. 15: 12 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 Any documents relating to an Organization Chart of the Defendant Hospital as it pertains to its EMS operations. Response to Request No. 15: The Hospital objects to Request No. 15 on the grounds that it is overly broad in time as itis not limited to the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December operations" 14, 2015, is vague and ambiguous as the phrase "EMS is undefined, and seeks information that is neither relevant nor likely to lead to the production of relevant evidence. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General operations" Objections, and assuming that by "EMS Plaintiff meant the EMS Department, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents. (NYP o328 - NYP o332) Request No. 16: Any documents relating to complaints made to the EEOC regarding religious discrimination/failure to accommodate from Defendant Hospital's employees. Response to Request No. 16: The Hospital objects to Request No. 16 on the grounds that it is overly broad in time as it seeks documents beyond the relevant time period of March 24, 2015 through December and to the extent it seeks documents protected the attorney- 14, 2015, by client privilege and/or attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiver of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents relating to complaints made to the EEOC regarding religious discrimination/failure to accommodate made by employees in the Hospital's EMS Department. (NYP - NYP o309 o327) Request No. 17: All other documents or communications supporting or contradicting Plaintiff's allegations against Defendant Hospital or in any other way reflecting, relating to, or 13 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 referring to the facts alleged in the Amended Complaint which have not been disclosed in response to any of the foregoing document requests. Response to Request No. 17: The Hospital objects to Request No. 17 on the ground that it is overly broad in communications" scope as it seeks "all other documents or having any relevance to the allegations in the Amended Complaint. Subject to and without waiving this specific objection and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents. (See NYP 0001 - NYP generally o427) Request No. 18: Please produce all documents you were requested to identify in plaintiffs first set of interrogatories to you in this action, or relating to or otherwise supporting your response to any interrogatory. Response to Request No. 18: The Hospital objects to Request No. 18 on the ground that it is overly broad in documents." scope as it seeks "all Subject to and without waiving this specific objection and General Objections, the Hospital will produce responsive, non-privileged documents. (See NYP o001 - NYP generally o427) Request No. 19: All documents relating to Plaintiff's damages including any documents supporting any contention that Plaintiff is not entitled to all or part of the damages claimed. Response to Request No. 19: The Hospital objects to Request No. 19 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "all" scope as it seeks documents and to the extent itseeks the production of documents not within the Hospital's possession, custody or control as only Plaintiff would have documents regarding her efforts to mitigate her damages. Subject to and without waiver 14 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/10/2018 06:17 PM INDEX NO. 510225/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 139 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/10/2018 of these specific objections and General Objections, the Hospital will produce documents Plaintiffs rate of pay. (NYP co41 - NYP regarding hourly o42) Request No. 20: Please produce all documents used in responding to the Amended Complaint. Response to Request No. 20: The Hospital objects to Request No. 20 on the grounds that it is overly broad in "all" scope as it seeks documents and seeks documents that will reveal attorney-client privileged communications and attorney work p