Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 13, 2019

Simon v. Manhattan Mini Storage, LLC

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:19-cv-05890
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Simon v. Manhattan Mini Storage, Judge McMahon dismissed the amended complaint after Simon failed to file a compliant second amended complaint.

Who this affects

Robert Simon’s amended complaint was dismissed. Any state-law claims he may have been asserting were not heard by the federal court, and fee-free status for an appeal was denied.

What happened

In Simon v. Manhattan Mini Storage, the court had ordered Robert Simon to file a second amended complaint. After finding that his proposed filing did not comply, the court gave him another 30 days to submit a compliant complaint.

Simon did not file the required complaint within that period, and the deadline expired. The court’s order warned that failing to comply would lead to dismissal.

Judge McMahon dismissed the amended complaint because it failed to state a claim, included frivolous claims, and asserted claims against defendants protected from lawsuits. The court declined to hear any state-law claims Simon may have been asserting and denied fee-free appeal status.

The detailed version

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

Case
Simon v. Manhattan Mini Storage, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-05890
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Nov. 13, 2019

Background

The court had ordered Robert Simon to file a second amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal. Simon submitted a proposed second amended complaint, but on October 11, 2019, the court ruled that it did not comply with the earlier order. The court nevertheless gave Simon 30 additional days to submit a compliant complaint and again warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal.

Simon did not file a second amended complaint, and the deadline expired.

Ruling

The court dismissed the amended complaint. It stated that the complaint failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted, asserted frivolous claims, and asserted claims against defendants who were immune from suit. The court also declined under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, meaning authority to hear related state-law claims, over any state-law claims Simon might have been asserting.

The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail Simon a copy of the order and record service on the docket. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Simon fee-free appeal status.

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.