Boyce-Lazare v. Chex Systems, Inc.
- Alison Nathan
- 1:20-cv-00678
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Boyce-Lazare v. Chex Systems, Judge Nathan required a response about amending the pleading and postponed the initial conference.
Kimberly Boyce-Lazare and Chex Systems, Inc.; the order required Boyce-Lazare to state whether she would amend her pleading and postponed the initial pretrial conference.
What happened
In Boyce-Lazare v. Chex Systems, Inc., Chex Systems had filed a motion to dismiss. The order did not decide that motion.
The court required Kimberly Boyce-Lazare to notify the court and Chex Systems by April 8, 2020, whether she would amend her pleading or rely on the pleading being challenged.
Judge Alison J. Nathan said that declining to amend in response to fully briefed arguments could affect the right to use the amendment process later. The court also adjourned the June 5, 2020 initial pretrial conference while the motion was pending.
The detailed version
- Boyce-Lazare v. Chex Systems, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-00678
- Alison Nathan
- Mar. 31, 2020
Background
Chex Systems, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss on March 26, 2020. This order addressed the next steps under Rule 3.F. of the court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases; it did not rule on the motion to dismiss.
Required response
The court ordered Kimberly Boyce-Lazare to notify the court and Chex Systems in writing by April 8, 2020, whether she intended to file an amended pleading and when she would do so, or whether she would rely on the pleading challenged by the motion. The order warned that declining to amend in a timely response to a fully briefed argument could constitute a waiver of the right to use the amendment process to cure defects made apparent by the defendant's briefing.
If Boyce-Lazare amended, Chex Systems could file an answer, file a new motion to dismiss, or submit a letter stating that it relied on the original motion. The order stated that it did not change the deadlines for amending, answering, or moving under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the court's Local Rules.
Disposition
The court adjourned the initial pretrial conference scheduled for June 5, 2020, pending resolution of the motion. Judge Alison J. Nathan did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss in this order. The opinion refers to the defendant's "October 22 motion," which appears inconsistent with its statement that the motion was filed on March 26, 2020; the order does not explain that reference.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.