Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 30, 2025

Buxbaum v. Walt Disney Co.

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:25-cv-02339
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Buxbaum v. Walt Disney Co., Judge Aaron said the plaintiff’s filings were premature because Disney had not been served.

Who this affects

Michael Buxbaum’s pending filings and service obligations were affected; Walt Disney Co. had not yet been served according to the order.

What happened

In Buxbaum v. Walt Disney Co., Michael Buxbaum filed affidavits, motion notices, and proposed emergency orders between April 2 and April 24, 2025. The court said these filings were premature because Walt Disney Co. had not yet been served with the lawsuit.

The court explained that Buxbaum was responsible for serving the summons and complaint within 90 days after filing. Because he filed the complaint on March 20, 2025, the service deadline was June 18, 2025.

Judge Stewart D. Aaron advised Buxbaum not to send further substantive correspondence unless the court specifically requested or permitted it. The order did not decide the underlying dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
Buxbaum v. Walt Disney Co. · No. 1:25-cv-02339
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Apr. 30, 2025

Background

Michael Buxbaum filed the complaint on March 20, 2025. Between April 2 and April 24, he filed various affidavits, notices of motion, and proposed emergency orders directing Walt Disney Co. to show cause.

Service of the Lawsuit

The court stated that all of Buxbaum’s filings were premature because Walt Disney Co. had not yet been served. Under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff is responsible for having the summons and complaint served within the time allowed by the rule. The court explained that the applicable period was 90 days after the complaint was filed, making the current service deadline June 18, 2025.

Order

The court advised that, unless and until Walt Disney Co. was properly served, further substantive correspondence from Buxbaum was inappropriate unless specifically requested or permitted by the court. The order did not decide the merits of Buxbaum’s claims and did not state that any particular motion was granted or denied. The order was signed by Stewart D. Aaron, United States Magistrate Judge.

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.