Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch2_p00252.png

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1325-14 Filed 01/04/24 Page 24 of 30 computation of damages. Rule 26(a)(1), governs “initial disclosures,” disclosures to be made at the beginning of litigation, prior to the completion of expert work. It does not entitle a party to expert discovery at this stage in the case. Ms. Giuffre has pleaded and will prove defamation per se, where damages are presumed. Robertson v. Dowbenko, 443 F. App'x at 661 (“As the district court correctly determined, Robertson was presumptively entitled to damages because he alleged defamation per se.”’). Under New York law, defamation per se, as alleged in this case, presumes damages, and special damages do not need to be pled and proven. See Celle v. Filipino Reporter Enters. Inc., 209 F.3d 163, 179 (2d Cir.2000) (Second Circuit holding that “[i]f a statement is defamatory per se, injury is assumed. In such a case ‘even where the plaintiff can show no actual damages at all, a plaintiff who has otherwise shown defamation may recover at least nominal damages,’” and confirming an award of punitive damages) (Emphasis added). Additionally, Ms. Giuffre has claimed punitive damages for the defamation per se. “{C]Jourts have generally recognized that ... punitive damages are typically not amenable to the type of disclosures contemplated by Rule 26(a)(1)(A)(iii), and have held that the failure to disclosure a number or calculation for such damages was substantially justified.” See Murray v. Miron, 2015 WL 4041340 (D. Conn., July 1, 2015). See also Scheel v. Harris, No. CIV.A. 3:11- 17-DCR, 2012 WL 3879279, at *7 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 6, 2012) (finding that a failure to provide a precise number or calculation for their punitive damages claim is substantially justified pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c)(1)). Accordingly, Ms. Giuffre’s disclosures comply with Rule 26 for the computation of damages. See Naylor v. Rotech Healthcare, Inc., 679 F. Supp. 2dat 510 (“The Court is skeptical of the need for so much additional discovery, since the only open issue on the defamation claim 20