Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 21, 2020

Horowitz v. Spark Energy, Inc.

Judge
Paul Gardephe
Docket
1:19-cv-07534
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Horowitz v. Spark Energy, Judge Gardephe denied as moot Defendants’ motion to dismiss the original complaint after Horowitz amended it.

Who this affects

The ruling affected Saul Horowitz and the Defendants by ending the pending motion to dismiss the original complaint without deciding its underlying arguments.

What happened

Horowitz v. Spark Energy, Inc. began when Saul Horowitz filed a complaint in New York state court, and Defendants later moved the case to federal court and sought dismissal.

Horowitz then received permission to file an amended complaint and did so. Because the complaint had been amended, the court denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss the original complaint as moot.

Judge Paul G. Gardephe ordered the Clerk of Court to terminate the docket entry for that motion. This order did not decide the motion’s underlying arguments.

The detailed version

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

Case
Horowitz v. Spark Energy, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-07534
Judge
Paul Gardephe
Date
Feb. 21, 2020

Background

Saul Horowitz began the action by filing a complaint in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Rockland, on July 3, 2019. Defendants removed the case to the Southern District of New York on August 12, 2019, and moved to dismiss the original complaint on August 19, 2019.

Horowitz later asked to file an amended complaint. Judge Deborah A. Batts, who had previously been assigned to the case, granted that request on October 23, 2019. Horowitz filed the amended complaint one week later. Defendants subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint.

Ruling

Because Horowitz amended the complaint, Judge Paul G. Gardephe denied as moot Defendants’ motion to dismiss the original complaint, docketed at Dkt. No. 16. A motion denied as moot is not decided on its underlying arguments because circumstances have made the motion no longer operative. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate Dkt. No. 16.

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.