Liguori, Jr. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:19-cv-10677
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Liguori, Jr. v. Wells Fargo Bank, Judge Briccetti ordered plaintiffs to say whether they would amend their complaint or proceed against the dismissal motion.
The order affects plaintiffs William Liguori, Jr., Tricia Liguori, Jose Aguilar, and Elizabeth Manley, and defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. It also concerns the people the plaintiffs sought to represent as similarly situated.
What happened
Liguori, Jr. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. involves four plaintiffs who sued Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. individually and on behalf of similarly situated people. The opinion does not describe the claims.
Wells Fargo had moved to dismiss the complaint on January 31, 2020. The court directed the plaintiffs to notify it by February 10 whether they intended to file an amended complaint or rely on the existing complaint.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti did not decide the dismissal motion in this order. He stated that, if plaintiffs chose to amend, they had 14 days after notifying the court to file the amended complaint; Wells Fargo would then have 21 days to answer, move to dismiss the amended complaint, or rely on its original motion.
The detailed version
- Liguori, Jr. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. · No. 7:19-cv-10677
- Vincent Briccetti
- Feb. 3, 2020
Background
William Liguori, Jr., Tricia Liguori, Jose Aguilar, and Elizabeth Manley brought the action individually and on behalf of all similarly situated people. The opinion does not state the legal claims or the factual allegations in the complaint.
Order
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. moved to dismiss the complaint on January 31, 2020. The court ordered the plaintiffs to notify the court by February 10, 2020, whether they would:
1. file an amended complaint in response to the motion; or 2. rely on the complaint challenged by the motion to dismiss.
If the plaintiffs chose not to amend, the motion to dismiss would proceed under the ordinary schedule. The court warned that it was unlikely to allow another amendment to address deficiencies revealed by the fully briefed motion arguments.
If the plaintiffs chose to amend, the court required them to file the amended complaint within 14 days after notifying the court of their decision. Within 21 days after the amendment, Wells Fargo could answer the amended complaint, file a motion to dismiss it, or notify the court that it would rely on its initial motion to dismiss. The deadlines for opposition and reply papers would otherwise be governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the court's local rules.
Disposition
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti issued a case-management order requiring the plaintiffs to choose how to proceed. The order did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss and did not decide the merits of the complaint.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.