Derti v. Barg
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:19-cv-10215
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Derti v. Barg, Judge Briccetti granted Derti leave to amend and denied the pending dismissal motion without prejudice.
Derti and the defendants; Derti may file an amended complaint, and the defendants must respond by the deadline set by the court.
What happened
In Derti v. Barg, the plaintiff, representing himself and proceeding without paying the filing fee, asked to file an amended complaint and respond to the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
The court granted the plaintiff’s request. It ordered him to file the amended complaint by February 9, 2021, and gave the defendants until March 2, 2021, to answer, file a motion, or otherwise respond.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti denied the pending motion to dismiss without prejudice and directed the clerk to terminate it. The opinion does not decide the claims’ merits.
The detailed version
- Derti v. Barg · No. 7:19-cv-10215
- Vincent Briccetti
- Jan. 19, 2021
Background
On January 14, 2021, the court received a letter from Derti, who was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. Derti asked for permission to file an amended complaint and a response to the defendant’s pending motion to dismiss, docketed as Doc. #22.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that a person representing himself should receive a reasonable opportunity to show that he has a valid claim. It also stated that leave to amend should generally be granted at least once when a generous reading of the complaint suggests that a valid claim might be stated. The opinion did not decide whether Derti’s claims ultimately have merit.
Ruling
The court granted Derti’s application. Derti was ordered to file the amended complaint by February 9, 2021. The defendants were given until March 2, 2021, to answer, file a motion, or otherwise respond to the amended complaint.
The court denied the pending motion to dismiss without prejudice and instructed the clerk to terminate that motion. “Without prejudice” means the denial did not permanently bar a later motion, although the opinion does not specify what later motion might be filed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.