Breuninger v. T. Edward Williams
- John Cronan
- 1:20-cv-07033
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Richard Breuninger v. T. Edward Williams, Judge Cronan requested briefing on whether an abuse-of-process counterclaim should be dismissed.
The counterclaimants and counterclaim defendants were affected because the court invited them to file letters addressing possible dismissal of the second abuse-of-process counterclaim.
What happened
In Richard Breuninger v. T. Edward Williams, the court addressed the counterclaimants’ second counterclaim, which alleges abuse of process. The order does not describe the underlying dispute beyond identifying the plaintiffs, defendants, counterclaimants, and counterclaim defendants.
The court allowed the counterclaimants and counterclaim defendants to file letters of up to three pages addressing whether the second counterclaim should be dismissed for failing to allege use of regularly issued legal process to compel someone to perform or refrain from an act. The letters were due by June 17, 2024, at 5:00 p.m.
Judge John P. Cronan issued the order on June 12, 2024. The order requested briefing and did not grant or deny a motion or dismiss the counterclaim.
The detailed version
- Breuninger v. T. Edward Williams · No. 1:20-cv-07033
- John Cronan
- June 12, 2024
Order
Judge Cronan directed the counterclaimants and counterclaim defendants to address whether the counterclaimants’ second counterclaim for abuse of process should be dismissed. The court cited the requirement that an abuse-of-process claim allege that the opposing party used regularly issued legal process to compel performance or forbearance of some act.
The court permitted each side to file a letter of no more than three pages by June 17, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. The order requested the parties’ positions on possible dismissal; it did not itself dismiss the counterclaim or otherwise rule on its merits.
Disposition
This order is a briefing directive, not a final ruling on the second counterclaim. Judge John P. Cronan did not state whether the abuse-of-process counterclaim would be dismissed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.