Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 10, 2025

Wynder, JR. v. Goltzer, Esq.

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:24-cv-07925
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Wynder v. Goltzer, Judge Woods denied Wynder’s default-judgment motion because Jeremy Schneider’s response deadline had been extended.

Who this affects

Plaintiff Kenneth N. Wynder, Jr.’s motion for default judgment against Jeremy Schneider was denied. The order also affected Jeremy Schneider and Ying Stafford by directing that they receive copies, and it denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees.

What happened

In Kenneth N. Wynder, Jr. v. George Goltzer, Esq., et al., the plaintiff moved for default judgment against defendant Jeremy Schneider on May 6, 2025, arguing that Schneider had not timely responded to the complaint.

The court denied the motion because Schneider was not in default. The court had extended Schneider’s deadline to answer or otherwise respond to July 7, 2025.

Judge Gregory H. Woods directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order to the plaintiff and two defendants. The court also said any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Wynder, JR. v. Goltzer, Esq. · No. 1:24-cv-07925
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
May 10, 2025

Background

On May 6, 2025, Plaintiff Kenneth N. Wynder, Jr. filed a motion for default judgment against Defendant Jeremy Schneider. Wynder argued that Schneider had failed to respond to the complaint on time.

Ruling

The court denied the motion. It stated that Schneider was not in default because the court had extended his deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint until July 7, 2025.

Other Orders

The Clerk of Court was directed to mail a copy of the order to Wynder and to Defendants Jeremy Schneider and Ying Stafford. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees for purposes of an appeal.

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.