On March 10, 2025, Justice Reed of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Dragons 516 Ltd. v. GDC 138 E 50 LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op. 50309(U), staying a civil action pending the resolution of a criminal action against a non-party officer of a corporate defendant, explaining:
Courts may grant a stay of proceedings upon such terms as may be just. When deciding whether to issue a stay under section 2201, courts consider issues of comity, orderly procedure, and judicial economy. Courts possess broad discretion to grant stays where appropriate, such as where a separately ongoing proceeding could dispose of or limit the issues to be resolved in the pending litigation.
Here, it is this court’s view that a stay of this civil action is appropriate. Given the nature of the pending criminal action against Gao as chief officer of SMI USA Group LLC, and the substance of the civil claims asserted by plaintiffs herein, a stay of this proceeding will further judicial economy and orderly procedure. The court acknowledges that a stay of an action pending the resolution of a criminal prosecution may cause inconvenience and delay to the plaintiff. Nevertheless, courts have made clear that the protection of the constitutional right against self-incrimination is the more important consideration.
Here, the court is unpersuaded that any undue prejudice resulting from a stay of proceedings has been identified — especially, where, as here, several defendants are identified as fact witnesses in the criminal proceeding, and plaintiff is identified as the complaining witness in the criminal proceeding.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).