Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 9, 2025

Renee v. Sisters Clarke Limited Liability Company

Full caption

Ciara Renee v. Sisters Clarke Limited Liability Company, Make Way Broadway Limited Liability Company, National Artists Management Company, Inc., Alecia Parker, P3 Productions a/k/a P Three Productions and Samuel Lopez

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:25-cv-06714
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Ciara Renee v. Sisters Clarke, Judge Torres denied as moot Renee’s motion to strike, required disclosures, and paused disqualification briefing.

Who this affects

Ciara Renee, Sisters Clarke, LLC, Make Way Broadway, LLC, Power of 3 Productions LLC, and the other defendants and attorneys involved in the pending motions.

What happened

In Ciara Renee v. Sisters Clarke Limited Liability Company, the court had ordered Ciara Renee to identify the citizenship of members of certain defendant limited liability companies. She filed an amended complaint, after which the defendants moved to dismiss for lack of federal subject-matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim.

Renee moved to strike the defendants’ dismissal motion, and later sought to disqualify their lawyers. The court required Sisters Clarke, LLC and Make Way Broadway, LLC to file either requests to submit their required citizenship disclosures under seal or the disclosures themselves by September 12, 2025. It denied Renee’s motion to strike as moot and postponed consideration of the lawyer-disqualification issue until the jurisdiction question is resolved.

Judge Analisa Torres did not decide the defendants’ motion to dismiss or the motion to disqualify their lawyers. She directed the Clerk of Court to terminate Renee’s motion to strike from the docket.

The detailed version

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

Case
Renee v. Sisters Clarke Limited Liability Company · No. 1:25-cv-06714
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Sept. 9, 2025

Background

In an August 18, 2025 order, the court directed Plaintiff Ciara Renee to amend her complaint to allege the citizenship of every member of the defendant entities claimed to be corporate entities, including Sisters Clarke, LLC; Make Way Broadway, LLC; and P3 Productions. Renee filed an amended complaint on August 22.

On September 3, the defendants jointly moved to dismiss the amended complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. Renee moved to strike that motion, asserting that it did not comply with Rule III of Judge Torres’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases. On September 5, Renee filed a pre-motion letter concerning a motion to disqualify the defendants’ attorneys.

Jurisdictional disclosures

The court explained that subject-matter jurisdiction must be addressed before the court considers a motion to disqualify counsel. In diversity cases, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 requires parties to disclose the citizenship of individuals or entities whose citizenship is attributed to them. The disclosure must generally be filed with the party’s first filing or other request addressed to the court.

The court stated that only Power of 3 Productions LLC, which claimed it had been incorrectly sued as “P3 Productions a/k/a P Three Productions,” had filed a Rule 7.1 disclosure statement. Sisters Clarke, LLC and Make Way Broadway, LLC had represented that they would seek permission to file their disclosure statements under seal, but the court had not received those submissions.

Rulings

The court ordered Sisters Clarke, LLC and Make Way Broadway, LLC to file, by September 12, 2025, either a motion for permission to file their Rule 7.1 disclosure statements under seal or the disclosure statements themselves.

The court denied Renee’s motion to strike the defendants’ motion to dismiss as moot. It held briefing on Renee’s motion to disqualify the defendants’ attorneys in abeyance, meaning the court postponed that briefing, until it resolved the jurisdictional issue. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 10.

The order did not decide the defendants’ motion to dismiss, the merits of Renee’s claims, or the motion to disqualify counsel.

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.