Rivera-Almodovar v. Instituto Socioeconomico, No. 12-2419 (1st Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff began working for INSEC in 1988. In 2003, employees under her charge began complaining of misconduct, mistreatment, and abuse. INSEC responded with progressive disciplinary sanctions, ultimately terminating her employment in 2009. Plaintiff sued, alleging violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. 621-634, and local law. In its initial scheduling order, the district court set a discovery deadline of October 30, 2011: more than a year after commencement of the action and more than seven months after the initial scheduling conference. The order contained a stern warning. On October 12, 2011, the plaintiff filed an unopposed motion to extend the discovery deadline to November 15. The district court allowed the extension. On November 15 the plaintiff claimed for the first time that documents produced during the extension were not responsive to her request. Two days later, the plaintiff moved for a further extension of the deadline. INSEC opposed the motion, maintaining that the plaintiff’s claimed plight was attributable to her own lack of diligence and that most of the requested documents did not exist and that others were so vaguely described that compliance was impossible. The district court entered summary judgment for INSEC. The First Circuit affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.