Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 31, 2020

Tucker v. C. & J. Clark Retail, Inc.

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:19-cv-10031
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Tucker v. C. & J. Clark Retail, Judge Torres denied as moot the motion to dismiss after Tucker filed an amended complaint.

Who this affects

Henry Tucker and the similarly situated people he sought to represent, as well as C. & J. Clark Retail, Inc.; the defendant's motion to dismiss the original complaint was denied as moot.

What happened

In Tucker v. C. & J. Clark Retail, Inc., the defendant moved to dismiss the original complaint for failing to state a claim.

Before the court ruled on that motion, Tucker filed an amended complaint under the federal rules of civil procedure. The amended complaint replaced the original complaint.

Judge Analisa Torres denied the motion to dismiss the original complaint as moot and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion. The order did not decide whether the complaint stated a valid claim.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tucker v. C. & J. Clark Retail, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-10031
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Mar. 31, 2020

Background

On February 28, 2020, C. & J. Clark Retail, Inc. moved to dismiss Henry Tucker's original complaint for failure to state a claim. On March 11, 2020, Tucker filed an amended complaint under Rule 15(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Ruling

Judge Analisa Torres held that the amended complaint superseded, or replaced, the original complaint. Because the defendant's motion addressed the original complaint, the motion no longer presented an issue for the court to decide. The court therefore denied as moot the motion to dismiss the original complaint.

Effect

The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 23. The order did not rule on whether Tucker's claims stated a valid legal claim and did not address the sufficiency of the amended complaint.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.