DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc. v. Pirozzi
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:19-cv-07326
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ditech Financial LLC v. Larry C. Pirozzi, Judge Briccetti extended Pirozzi’s response deadline and denied fee-free appeal status.
The defendant, Larry C. Pirozzi, received additional time to oppose Ditech Financial LLC’s summary-judgment motion. Ditech received a deadline for any reply. The order also denied fee-free appeal status to the defendant.
What happened
In Ditech Financial LLC v. Larry C. Pirozzi, Ditech Financial LLC moved for summary judgment. The defendant, who was representing himself, did not respond by the original deadline.
The court extended the defendant’s deadline to oppose the motion to April 21, 2021, and set May 5, 2021, as the deadline for any reply by Ditech. The court warned that no further extension would be granted and that it would treat the motion as submitted without opposition if no response was filed.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order, finding that such an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide the summary-judgment motion itself.
The detailed version
- DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc. v. Pirozzi · No. 7:19-cv-07326
- Vincent Briccetti
- Mar. 22, 2021
Background
On December 10, 2020, the court extended Ditech Financial LLC’s deadline to file a motion for summary judgment to February 12, 2021. Under that order, the defendant, who was proceeding without a lawyer, was required to respond to any summary-judgment motion by March 15, 2021.
Ditech filed its motion for summary judgment on February 11, 2021. As of the date of this order, the defendant had not responded.
Order
The court extended the defendant’s deadline to oppose the summary-judgment motion to April 21, 2021. Ditech’s deadline to file any reply was set for May 5, 2021. The court stated that it would grant no further extensions of the defendant’s opposition deadline.
The court further stated that, if the defendant did not oppose the motion by April 21, it would deem the motion fully submitted and unopposed and would decide it later. This order did not rule on the merits of the summary-judgment motion.
Appeal Status and Service
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied the defendant permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees. The court also ordered its chambers to mail the order to the defendant at the address on the docket and email it to the address the defendant had provided.
Disposition
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti extended the defendant’s deadline to oppose Ditech’s motion for summary judgment and set a reply deadline. The court also denied fee-free status for an appeal from the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.