Edwards v. Feldman
- Nelson Roman
- 7:17-cv-10116
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In Edwards v. Feldman, Judge Roman waived a conference requirement and set deadlines for defendants’ motions to dismiss.
The order affects Theodore Brandon Edwards, Dr. Feldman, and Orange Regional Medical Center by setting the process and deadlines for the defendants’ proposed motions to dismiss.
What happened
Edwards v. Feldman concerns Theodore Brandon Edwards’s amended complaint against Dr. Feldman and Orange Regional Medical Center. The court had previously dismissed his original complaint and allowed him to amend claims dismissed without prejudice.
Dr. Feldman withdrew an earlier motion to dismiss and requested permission to file another one. Orange Regional Medical Center also requested permission to file a motion to dismiss. Edwards asked the court about the case’s status and requested a conference.
Judge Nelson S. Roman waived the required preliminary conference, allowed the defendants to file their motions to dismiss, and set briefing deadlines. The court did not decide whether the amended complaint stated a valid claim, and directed the clerk to terminate the earlier motions.
The detailed version
- Edwards v. Feldman · No. 7:17-cv-10116
- Nelson Roman
- Nov. 18, 2020
Background
Theodore Brandon Edwards filed the action in 2017 against Dr. Feldman, R.N. K. Georgy, Dr. John Doe, Orange County Medical Regional, and Orange County. On February 10, 2020, the court dismissed the complaint and allowed Edwards to file an amended complaint concerning claims dismissed without prejudice. Edwards then filed an amended complaint against Dr. Feldman and Orange Regional Medical Center.
Requests for Permission to File Motions
Dr. Feldman initially filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint but withdrew it the next day and requested a preliminary conference before filing another motion. Orange Regional Medical Center separately requested permission to file a motion to dismiss before answering the amended complaint. Edwards later asked the court about the status of the case and requested a conference. The court stated that it had received no correspondence from Edwards concerning the defendants’ requests for a preliminary conference.
Ruling
The court waived the preliminary-conference requirement and permitted the defendants to file their motions to dismiss. It set these deadlines: moving papers were to be served on December 21, 2020; Edwards’s opposition was to be served on February 8, 2021; and the defendants’ replies were to be served on February 22, 2021. All motion documents were to be filed on February 22, 2021, with courtesy copies sent to chambers. The clerk was directed to terminate the motions listed at ECF Nos. 55 and 63, mail the endorsement to Edwards, and show service on the docket. This endorsement did not decide the merits of the amended complaint or the proposed motions to dismiss.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.