Oppedisano v. Zur
- Loretta Preska
- 1:20-cv-05395
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Oppedisano v. Zur, Judge Briccetti ordered Oppedisano to say whether he would amend his complaint or proceed against Zur’s dismissal motion.
Vincenzo Oppedisano and Lynda Zur; the order set deadlines and options for responding to Zur’s pending motion to dismiss.
What happened
In Oppedisano v. Zur, Lynda Zur filed a motion asking the court to dismiss Vincenzo Oppedisano’s complaint for failure to state a claim.
The court gave Oppedisano until August 13, 2020, to notify the court whether he would file an amended complaint or rely on the existing complaint. The opinion did not decide the motion to dismiss.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti ordered that, if Oppedisano chose to amend, he had 14 days after notifying the court to file the amended complaint. Zur would then have 21 days to answer, file a new dismissal motion, or rely on her original motion.
The detailed version
- Oppedisano v. Zur · No. 1:20-cv-05395
- Loretta Preska
- Aug. 4, 2020
Background
On August 3, 2020, defendant Lynda Zur filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which asks the court to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a legally sufficient claim. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
Order
The court ordered plaintiff Vincenzo Oppedisano to notify the court by letter no later than August 13, 2020, whether he intended to file an amended complaint in response to the motion or would rely on the complaint already under attack.
If Oppedisano chose not to amend, the motion would proceed under the normal briefing schedule. The court stated that it was unlikely to give him another opportunity to amend based on deficiencies made apparent by the fully briefed motion. The court cited decisions discussing circumstances in which leave to amend may properly be denied, including undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, and futility.
If Oppedisano chose to amend, he had to file the amended complaint within 14 days after notifying the court. Within 21 days after the amendment, Zur could answer the amended complaint, file a motion to dismiss it, or notify the court that she would rely on her initial motion to dismiss. The court also stated that any requests for more time to brief the motion had to follow the applicable federal and local rules and the judge’s individual practices.
Disposition
The opinion issued case-management instructions and did not grant or deny the pending motion to dismiss. The judge identified in the signed order is Vincent L. Briccetti.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.