United States v. Doonan
- John Cronan
- 1:19-cv-09578
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In United States v. Doonan, Judge Cronan’s case materials show the Government requesting more time to seek striking of a corporate answer filed by a self-represented defendant.
The Government, William Doonan, and William Doonan and Associates, Inc. are affected by the requested deadline extension and anticipated motion concerning the answer filed for WDA.
What happened
United States v. Doonan concerns a Government request for additional time to file a motion challenging an answer filed by William Doonan for himself and William Doonan and Associates, Inc. The filing says Doonan was representing himself without a lawyer.
The Government asked to move its filing deadline from December 30, 2019, to a date set at the January 6, 2020 initial pretrial conference. The filing says Doonan agreed to the extension and that it was the Government’s first request.
The provided text does not contain a court ruling or disposition. Judge Cronan is identified in the case metadata, although the letter itself is addressed to Judge Analisa Torres.
The detailed version
- United States v. Doonan · No. 1:19-cv-09578
- John Cronan
- Dec. 23, 2019
Nature of the filing
The provided document is a letter from the United States Attorney’s Office, not a judicial opinion or order. The Government says it represents the United States in the case and asks for an extension of time to file an anticipated motion to strike the answer filed by William Doonan and William Doonan and Associates, Inc. (WDA).
Request and stated basis
The Government asks to extend the deadline from December 30, 2019, to a date the court would set at the initial pretrial conference scheduled for January 6, 2020. The letter says William Doonan filed an answer for himself and WDA while representing himself without a lawyer. It cites a prior Southern District of New York decision for the stated rule that a corporation cannot represent itself in federal court.
Positions and status
The Government says William Doonan consented to the extension and that this was the Government’s first request for an extension. The document does not state that the court granted or denied the request, does not resolve the anticipated motion to strike, and does not decide the underlying case. The supplied metadata identifies Judge John Cronan, while the letter is addressed to Judge Analisa Torres; the provided materials do not explain that discrepancy.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.