Greenwood v. American Kennel Club
- Gregory Woods
- 1:23-cv-10516
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Greenwood v. American Kennel Club, Judge Woods declined to consider Greenwood’s opposition because the challenged motion had already been denied.
Elaine Greenwood and the American Kennel Club; the court did not decide the merits of Greenwood’s amended complaint.
What happened
Elaine Greenwood amended her complaint after the American Kennel Club moved to dismiss her original complaint. The case is Greenwood v. American Kennel Club.
Because the amended complaint replaced the original complaint, the court denied the motion to dismiss the original complaint as no longer requiring a ruling. Greenwood later filed an opposition to that motion.
The court said the opposition had no effect because the motion had already been denied and therefore would not consider it. Judge Gregory H. Woods directed the Clerk to mail the order to Greenwood and terminate the pending motion.
The detailed version
- Greenwood v. American Kennel Club · No. 1:23-cv-10516
- Gregory Woods
- July 24, 2025
Background
The American Kennel Club moved to dismiss Elaine Greenwood’s original complaint on June 27, 2025. In response, Greenwood amended her complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B).
Court’s Analysis
An amended complaint ordinarily replaces the original complaint and makes the original complaint legally ineffective. The court therefore denied the American Kennel Club’s motion to dismiss the original complaint as moot on July 21, 2025. Because that motion had already been denied, the court determined that Greenwood’s July 23 opposition to the motion had no effect.
Ruling and Case Status
The court stated that it would not consider Greenwood’s opposition. It directed the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of the order to Greenwood at the address listed in the order and to terminate the motion pending at Dkt. No. 29. This order did not rule on the merits of the claims in the amended complaint.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.