Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 14, 2025

Girotto v. Hastens Beds, Inc.

Judge
Garnett
Docket
1:24-cv-02552
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Girotto v. Hastens Beds, Judge Garnett dismissed Bondell without prejudice for ineffective service and warned of possible $500 attorney-fee sanctions.

Who this affects

Martin Bondell was dismissed from the case without prejudice because he was not effectively and timely served. The case continued as to VRT Ventures LLC, and Luigi Girotto was ordered to address possible $500 attorney-fee sanctions.

What happened

In Girotto v. Hastens Beds, Inc., Luigi Girotto added Martin Bondell as a defendant in his Second Amended Complaint. Bondell argued that Girotto had not timely served him under the federal service rule.

The court found that Girotto repeatedly missed deadlines and filed requests concerning service late. Girotto ultimately sent the summons by first-class mail, but the court had already denied permission to use that method, and the mailing did not satisfy the service rule.

Judge Margaret M. Garnett granted Bondell’s motion to dismiss in part and dismissed Bondell from the action without prejudice. The court left the case’s other dates and deadlines in place as to VRT Ventures LLC and ordered Girotto to explain why $500 in attorney’s fees should not be imposed as a sanction.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Girotto v. Hastens Beds, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-02552
Judge
Garnett
Date
Feb. 14, 2025

Background

Luigi Girotto filed this action on April 3, 2024. He later filed a Second Amended Complaint that named Martin Bondell for the first time. Bondell moved to dismiss that complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), which generally requires service within 90 days after a complaint is filed.

The court had previously denied Girotto’s request to serve Bondell by alternative means, specifically by mail. After the service deadline passed, the court gave Girotto additional time to file proof of service or a waiver and warned that failure to do so would result in Bondell’s dismissal. Girotto then filed an affidavit stating that Bondell had been served by first-class United States Postal Service mail. The court determined that this method did not satisfy Rule 4’s service requirements and had been expressly rejected in its earlier orders.

Ruling

The court found that Girotto had not effectively and timely served Bondell and had repeatedly failed, without adequate justification, to comply with court orders concerning service. Judge Margaret M. Garnett therefore granted in part Bondell’s motion to dismiss and dismissed Defendant Bondell from the action without prejudice. The opinion does not identify what additional portion of the motion was granted or how any remaining portion was resolved.

The court kept the existing dates and deadlines in effect as to VRT Ventures LLC, including the Initial Pretrial Conference scheduled for March 4, 2025. It also ordered Girotto to show cause at that conference why $500 in attorney’s fees should not be imposed as a sanction for failing to comply with the court’s orders. The clerk was directed to terminate the docket entry for Bondell’s motion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.