Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 3, 2020

Nelkenbaum v. State of New York

Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Docket
7:19-cv-07953
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Nelkenbaum v. Wellington, Judge Briccetti extended Nelkenbaum’s deadline to oppose Wellington’s dismissal motion and denied fee-free status for any appeal.

Who this affects

Yehuda Nelkenbaum received additional time to oppose Leigh Wellington’s motion to dismiss. The order also denied Nelkenbaum permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal from this order.

What happened

Nelkenbaum v. Wellington involved Leigh Wellington’s motion to dismiss Yehuda Nelkenbaum’s amended complaint. Nelkenbaum was representing himself and had permission to proceed without paying court fees.

Wellington mailed Nelkenbaum the motion and supporting papers on May 5, 2020. Nelkenbaum’s response was due May 19, 2020, but he had not responded or asked for more time.

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti extended the response deadline to June 24, 2020. The court said the motion would be treated as ready for decision and unopposed if Nelkenbaum did not respond, and it denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Nelkenbaum v. State of New York · No. 7:19-cv-07953
Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Date
June 3, 2020

Background

Leigh Wellington moved to dismiss Yehuda Nelkenbaum’s amended complaint on May 5, 2020, and mailed Nelkenbaum copies of the motion and supporting documents. The opinion states that Nelkenbaum was proceeding without a lawyer and had permission to proceed without paying court fees. His opposition was due May 19, 2020.

Order

Nelkenbaum had not opposed the motion or requested an extension by the time of the order. The court extended his deadline to respond until June 24, 2020. The court stated that, if he did not respond by that date, the motion would be treated as ready for decision and unopposed. If he responded, any reply from the defendants would be due July 1, 2020.

Appeal and effect

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Nelkenbaum permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide Wellington’s motion to dismiss.

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.