Difference between condition order and standard order

Understanding Discovery Orders: Conditional vs. Standard

In New York litigation, the type of discovery order issued by a court can significantly impact your case strategy and potential outcomes. Understanding whether you’re dealing with a conditional “self-executing” order or a standard order is crucial for attorneys and parties involved in litigation. The distinction affects deadlines, enforcement mechanisms, and the consequences of non-compliance.

Discovery disputes are common in personal injury cases, where obtaining necessary medical records and depositions can be time-sensitive and critical to case development. A recent First Department decision in Seck v Serrano illustrates why recognizing the difference between these two types of orders matters.

Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:

Seck v Serrano, 2015 NY Slip Op 00596 (1st Dept. 2015)

“We note that the order was not a conditional, “self-executing” order, which required discovery to be complied with by a specific date, that becomes “absolute” on the specified date if the condition has not been met (see Wilson v Galacia Contr. & Restoration Corp., 10 NY3d 827, 830 ). Rather, defendants were authorized to renew their application for dismissal if plaintiff failed to comply with the discovery demands by the 20-day deadline. Defendants did not so move, and months later, when they finally did, they were already in receipt of all discovery demanded pursuant to the order.”

Conditional orders can be deadly; standard orders are iffy.

Key Takeaway

Conditional discovery orders automatically become enforceable on specified dates without further court intervention, making non-compliance potentially fatal to your case. Standard orders require parties to return to court to seek enforcement, providing more flexibility but also creating uncertainty about timing and procedural requirements. Always identify which type of order you’re dealing with to develop appropriate compliance strategies.