Feliz v. City of New York
- Denise Cote
- 1:19-cv-06305
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Feliz v. City of New York, Judge Nathan required a response about amendment and stayed discovery without deciding the pending motion.
Robinson Feliz and the defendants: Feliz had to choose how to respond to the pending motion by August 28, 2020, and discovery was stayed for the parties pending further order.
What happened
In Feliz v. City of New York, the defendants filed a motion asking for judgment based on the existing pleadings. The court gave Robinson Feliz until August 28, 2020, to say whether he would amend his pleading or rely on it as written.
The order warned that declining to amend in response to the defendants’ arguments could affect his ability to use the amendment process later. If he amended, the defendants could withdraw their motion, file a new one, or rely on the original motion.
Judge Alison J. Nathan also stayed discovery until further order and stated that the order did not change deadlines under the federal or local rules. The court did not decide the motion for judgment on the pleadings.
The detailed version
- Feliz v. City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-06305
- Denise Cote
- Aug. 18, 2020
Background
On August 7, 2020, the defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). The opinion does not decide whether that motion should be granted or denied.
Order
The court directed Robinson Feliz to notify the court and the defendants in writing by August 28, 2020, whether he intended to file an amended pleading and when, or whether he would rely on the pleading challenged by the defendants’ motion.
The court warned that declining to amend while timely responding to the fully briefed arguments in the defendants’ motion could amount to waiving the right to use the amendment process to cure defects identified in the defendants’ briefing. If Feliz amended, the defendants could withdraw their motion, file a new motion for judgment on the pleadings, or state that they relied on the original motion.
Other Ruling
The court stayed discovery pending further order. It also stated that the order did not alter the deadlines for amending, answering, or moving under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Rules. The order was signed by Alison J. Nathan, United States District Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.