Webster-Cato v. Liberty Coca-Cola Beverages LLC
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-10968
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Webster-Cato v. Liberty Coca-Cola Beverages LLC, Judge Briccetti gave Webster-Cato a choice to amend her complaint or proceed against the dismissal motion.
Donna Webster-Cato and Liberty Coca-Cola Beverages LLC; the order governed whether Webster-Cato would amend her complaint and how Liberty Coca-Cola’s pending motion to dismiss would proceed.
What happened
Webster-Cato v. Liberty Coca-Cola Beverages LLC concerns the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, filed on March 19, 2021.
The court ordered the plaintiff to notify it by March 29 whether she would file an amended complaint or rely on the existing complaint. If she amended, the defendant could answer, move to dismiss the amended complaint, or rely on its initial motion.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti did not decide the motion to dismiss. He stated that, if the plaintiff did not amend, the motion would proceed under the regular schedule and the court was unlikely to allow another amendment opportunity to address deficiencies raised in the motion.
The detailed version
- Webster-Cato v. Liberty Coca-Cola Beverages LLC · No. 7:20-cv-10968
- Vincent Briccetti
- Mar. 22, 2021
Background
Liberty Coca-Cola Beverages LLC moved to dismiss Donna Webster-Cato’s complaint on March 19, 2021.
Order
The court ordered Webster-Cato to notify the court by March 29, 2021, whether she intended to file an amended complaint in response to the motion or would rely on the complaint already filed.
If Webster-Cato chose not to amend, the motion to dismiss would proceed in the regular course. The court stated that it was unlikely to grant her another opportunity to amend to address deficiencies made apparent by the fully briefed arguments in the motion.
If she chose to amend, she had to file the amended complaint no later than 14 days after notifying the court of that decision. Within 21 days after the amendment, Liberty Coca-Cola Beverages LLC could file an answer, file a motion to dismiss the amended complaint, or notify the court that it was relying on its initial motion to dismiss. The court also stated that the deadlines for opposing and reply papers would be governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Civil Rules unless the court ordered otherwise.
Disposition
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss and did not decide the sufficiency of the complaint. The order addressed the plaintiff’s amendment choice and the next steps for the pending motion.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.