Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 28, 2025

1st Amendment Praetorian v. The New York Times Company

Docket
1:23-cv-00012
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Motion to DismissCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In 1st Amendment Praetorian v. The New York Times Company, the court granted dismissal, dismissed the claims, and closed the case.

Who this affects

The plaintiff’s claims were dismissed, and the defendants prevailed on their motion to dismiss. The case was closed.

What happened

In 1st Amendment Praetorian v. The New York Times Company, the defendants asked the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims.

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. The judgment states that allowing the plaintiff to amend the claims would be futile.

The court entered judgment for the defendants and closed the case. The opinion text provided does not name the judge; the judgment was dated March 28, 2025.

The detailed version

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

Case
1st Amendment Praetorian v. The New York Times Company · No. 1:23-cv-00012
Date
Mar. 28, 2025

Ruling

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. It dismissed the plaintiff’s claims and found that granting leave to amend would be futile. The judgment does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

Disposition

The case was closed. The provided judgment refers to the court’s Opinion and Order dated March 28, 2025, but that underlying opinion is not included here. The judgment was signed by the clerk of court, Tammi M. Hellwig, not by a named judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.