BUECHLER
v.
RUMBLE, INC.

M.D. Fla. | 2022-12-12
No. 8:22-cv-2237
District Court, M.D. Florida (2022)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

The court held that a motion to stay discovery pending resolution of a motion to dismiss is generally disfavored and requires a showing of clear merit and prejudice.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiffs sued Defendant Rumble Inc. Rumble moved to stay discovery pending resolution of its motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs opposed the motion.…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Inherent Power Of District Courts Discretion To Stay Proceedings

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Inherent Power Of District Courts cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Defendant Rumble Inc. (Rumble) moves for entry of an order staying discovery pending resolution of its motion to dismiss Plaintiffs James Buechler’s and Jesse Martinez’s (collectively, the plaintiffs) complaint. (Doc. 30). The plaintiffs oppose the motion. (Doc. 31). District courts have inherent power to control their dockets and manage their cases. Equity Lifestyle Prop., Inc. v. Fla. Mowing and Landscaping Serv., Inc., 556 F. 3d 1232, 1240 (11th Cir. 2009). This inherent power includes the discretion to stay the proceedings. Andersons, Inc. v. Enviro Granulation, LLC, No. 8:13-cv-3004-T-33MAP, 2014 WL 4059886 at * 2 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 14, 2014). “Motions to stay discovery pending ruling on a dispositive motion are generally disfavored in this district.” Ray v. Spirit Airlines, Inc., No. 12-61528-CIV, 2012 WL 5471793, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 9, 2012).1

In deciding a defendant’s request for a stay of discovery pending a ruling on a dispositive motion, “it is necessary for the court to ‘take a preliminary peek’ at the merits of the [dispositive motion] to see if it appears to be clearly meritorious and truly case dispositive.” Feldman v. Flood, 176 F.R.D. 651, 652

(M.D. Fla. 1997). When evaluating whether a motion to dismiss is “clearly meritorious,” courts consider whether “any binding Eleventh Circuit authority” clearly requires dismissal of the claims. See Meyer v. Diversified Consultants, Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-393-J-34JBT, 2014 WL 5471114, at *2

(M.D. Fla. Oct. 29, 2014). In addition, “discovery stay motions are generally denied except where a specific showing of prejudice or burdensomeness is made or where a statute dictates that a stay is appropriate or mandatory.” Montoya v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 14-20474-CIV, 2014 WL 2807617, at *2 (S.D. Fla. June

20, 2014). “Ultimately, the proponent of the stay bears the burden of demonstrating its necessity, appropriateness, and reasonableness.” Ray, 2012 WL 5471793, at *1.

Aranda. Agneh Sarioug

AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE

United States Magistrate Judge

Footnotes
1 “Normally, the pendency of a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment will not justify a unilateral motion to stay discovery pending resolution of the dispositive motion. Such motions for stay are rarely granted. However, unusual circumstances may justify a stay of discovery in a particular case upon a specific showing of prejudice or undue burden.” Middle District Discovery (2021) § I.E.4. A preliminary review of Rumble’s motion to dismiss reveals it does not meet the extraordinarily stringent “clearly meritorious” standard. Rumble also failed to demonstrate prejudice or undue burden if discovery proceeds. Thus, the balance tips in favor of requiring discovery to go forward. Accordingly, Rumble’s Motion to Stay Discovery (Doc. 31) is DENIED. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on December 12, 2022.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw