Wallace v. Nuvance Health
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-00545
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Wallace v. Nuvance Health, Judge Briccetti ordered Leah Wallace to choose whether to amend her complaint before defendants’ dismissal motion proceeds.
Leah Wallace, Nuvance Health, and Health Quest Systems, Inc.; the order established Wallace’s amendment deadline and the defendants’ subsequent response options.
What happened
In Wallace v. Nuvance Health, Nuvance Health and Health Quest Systems, Inc. asked the court to dismiss Leah Wallace’s complaint under federal rules governing jurisdiction and legal sufficiency. The court did not decide that motion.
The court ordered Wallace to notify it by March 30, 2020, whether she would file an amended complaint or rely on her existing complaint. If she amended, she had 14 days after notifying the court to file it. The defendants then had 21 days to answer, file a new dismissal motion, or rely on their original motion.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti issued the order on March 20, 2020. If Wallace did not amend, the original dismissal motion would proceed under the usual schedule, and the court said it was unlikely to allow another amendment opportunity to address deficiencies raised in that motion.
The detailed version
- Wallace v. Nuvance Health · No. 7:20-cv-00545
- Vincent Briccetti
- Mar. 20, 2020
Background
Leah Wallace sued Nuvance Health and Health Quest Systems, Inc., individually and on behalf of herself and others similarly situated. On March 19, 2020, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Rule 12(b)(1) concerns the court’s authority to hear a case, while Rule 12(b)(6) concerns whether a complaint adequately states a legal claim.
Order
The court ordered Wallace to notify it by March 30, 2020, whether she intended to file an amended complaint in response to the motion or would rely on the existing complaint.
If Wallace chose not to amend, the motion to dismiss would proceed under the regular schedule. The court stated that it was unlikely to grant Wallace another opportunity to amend to address deficiencies made apparent by the fully briefed arguments in the defendants’ motion.
If Wallace chose to amend, she was required to file the amended complaint no later than 14 days after notifying the court of that choice. Within 21 days after the amendment, the defendants could answer the amended complaint, file a motion to dismiss it, or notify the court that they would rely on their initial motion to dismiss. The court also stated that the time for opposition and reply papers would be governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the court’s local rules unless the court ordered otherwise.
Disposition and significance
This order set deadlines and options concerning the pending motion to dismiss. It did not grant or deny that motion and did not decide the merits of Wallace’s claims. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti signed the order on March 20, 2020.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.