Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 5, 2025

Hedges v. Sebago USA, LLC

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:25-cv-03621
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hedges v. Sebago USA, Judge Broderick ordered plaintiffs to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failing to serve defendant.

Who this affects

Donna Hedges and the other plaintiffs, as well as Sebago USA, LLC.

What happened

In Hedges v. Sebago USA, LLC, Donna Hedges and the other plaintiffs filed the case on May 1, 2025, and obtained a summons the next day. They had not filed proof of service or taken other action to move the case forward.

The court ordered the plaintiffs to submit, by August 29, 2025, a letter of no more than three pages explaining why there was good cause for not serving Sebago USA, LLC within the required period. The letter had to be supported by legal authority.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick warned that failing to submit the letter and show good cause would result in dismissal of the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). The order did not itself dismiss the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hedges v. Sebago USA, LLC · No. 1:25-cv-03621
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Aug. 5, 2025

Background

Donna Hedges and the other plaintiffs filed this action against Sebago USA, LLC on May 1, 2025. Plaintiffs obtained a summons on May 2, 2025. As of the order, however, they had not filed an affidavit of service or taken any other action to prosecute the case.

Order to Show Cause

The court ordered plaintiffs to submit, no later than August 29, 2025, a letter of no more than three pages, supported by legal authority, demonstrating good cause for why the case should not be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). The rule concerns the timely service of process—the formal delivery of the lawsuit and summons to the defendant.

Good-Cause Standard

The court stated that good cause generally exists only in exceptional circumstances when a plaintiff’s failure to serve the defendant on time resulted from circumstances beyond the plaintiff’s control. The court may consider the plaintiff’s diligence in attempting proper service and any prejudice caused to the defendant by the delay. The court also stated that an attorney’s inadvertence, neglect, mistake, or misplaced reliance does not constitute good cause.

Disposition and Effect

Judge Vernon S. Broderick did not dismiss the case in this order. Instead, he ordered plaintiffs to explain why dismissal should not occur and warned that failure to submit the required letter and demonstrate good cause for not serving Sebago USA, LLC within ninety days after the complaint was filed would result in dismissal of the action.

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.