Rodriguez Ordonez v. Wolf
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:20-cv-01727
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Rodriguez Ordonez v. Wolf, Judge Hellerstein limited oral argument to the amended petition and excluded new health arguments raised in reply.
Petitioner Diego Dilan Rodriguez Ordonez, whose new arguments were excluded from oral argument, and the scheduled telephonic hearing.
What happened
Rodriguez Ordonez v. Wolf concerned arguments in Diego Dilan Rodriguez Ordonez’s reply brief that were not included in his amended petition. The new arguments involved his alleged obesity and high blood pressure.
The court said those arguments would not be considered at the scheduled telephonic oral argument. The hearing would address only issues raised in the amended petition.
Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein also said Rodriguez Ordonez must file a motion if he wants to amend his petition a second time after the argument. The order did not decide the underlying issues in the petition.
The detailed version
- Rodriguez Ordonez v. Wolf · No. 1:20-cv-01727
- Alvin Hellerstein
- Apr. 21, 2020
Background
Diego Dilan Rodriguez Ordonez filed an amended petition. In his reply brief, he raised arguments about his alleged obesity and high blood pressure that were not included in that amended petition.
Court’s ruling
The court ordered that the new arguments would not be considered at the next day’s telephonic oral argument. The hearing would focus only on issues raised in the amended petition. The court also stated that, if Rodriguez Ordonez wanted to amend the petition for a second time after the argument, he would have to file a motion requesting permission to do so.
Effect of the order
This was an order regulating the proceedings. It limited the issues for oral argument but did not decide the merits of the petition or grant or deny a second amendment because no such motion was before the court.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.