Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 27, 2020

Abraham v. Leigh

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:17-cv-05429
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Abraham v. Leigh, Judge Failla ordered attorney Robyn Abraham to show good cause before seeking permission to file a late summary-judgment motion.

Who this affects

Robyn Abraham and the Leigh Defendants; the order set conditions for Abraham's possible summary-judgment motion and allowed the defendants to respond.

What happened

In Abraham v. Leigh, Robyn Abraham asked to file a motion for summary judgment. The Leigh Defendants opposed her request.

The court had previously set November 15, 2019, as the deadline for pre-motion letters about planned summary-judgment motions. Abraham did not file her letter by that deadline, and the court was concerned that allowing her to proceed later would unfairly disadvantage the defendants, whose motion had already been filed.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla ordered Abraham, if she wished to file the motion, to submit by March 6, 2020, a letter of no more than three pages explaining why she missed the deadline. The defendants could reply by March 13, 2020. The order did not decide the merits of any summary-judgment motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Abraham v. Leigh · No. 1:17-cv-05429
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Feb. 27, 2020

Background

Robyn Abraham asked the court to permit her to file a motion for summary judgment. The court considered her February 25, 2020 letter, the Leigh Defendants’ opposition, and her reply.

The court explained that its June 10, 2019 order had set November 15, 2019, as the deadline for the parties to submit pre-motion letters about contemplated summary-judgment motions. Abraham did not submit a letter by that deadline. Because no pre-motion submission had been filed, the court had not set a briefing schedule for her potential motion. The court also noted that the defendants’ summary-judgment motion had already been filed more than a month earlier.

Ruling

The court stated that Abraham had not satisfied the conditions for filing a summary-judgment motion and expressed concern that allowing a motion at that late stage would prejudice the defendants. The court also noted that Abraham was an attorney and therefore was not entitled to the special consideration generally given to people representing themselves without lawyers.

The court ordered that, if Abraham wished to file a summary-judgment motion, she had to submit a letter by March 6, 2020, showing good cause for missing the November 15, 2019 deadline. The letter could not exceed three pages. The defendants could file a reply by March 13, 2020. This order did not decide the merits of any summary-judgment motion.

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.