Latimer v. Royce
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:21-cv-01275
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Latimer v. Royce, Judge Briccetti denied Corey A. Latimer, Sr.’s premature summary-judgment motion without prejudice because defendants had not answered or been served.
Corey A. Latimer, Sr., whose motion for summary judgment was denied without prejudice; the defendants remained in the case because the order did not decide the underlying claims.
What happened
In Latimer v. Royce, Corey A. Latimer, Sr., who was representing himself, asked the court to grant summary judgment. The defendants had not yet answered the complaint, and the record did not show that they had been served.
The court explained that summary judgment is available only when there is no genuine dispute about an important fact and the moving party is legally entitled to win. The complaint alone did not show that Latimer met that standard.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti denied Latimer’s motion without prejudice because it was premature, allowing him to file it again at an appropriate time. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying fees.
The detailed version
- Latimer v. Royce · No. 7:21-cv-01275
- Vincent Briccetti
- Apr. 8, 2021
Background
Corey A. Latimer, Sr., was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. On April 7, 2021, he filed a motion for summary judgment. The court had previously issued an order directing service on March 23, 2021. The defendants had not answered the complaint, and the record did not indicate that they had been served.
Legal standard
Under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment may be granted only when there is no genuine dispute about any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court concluded that the complaint alone did not show that Latimer was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Ruling
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti denied Latimer’s motion as premature and denied it without prejudice to refiling at an appropriate time. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Latimer permission to appeal without paying the required fees.
Who was affected
The ruling directly affected Corey A. Latimer, Sr.’s summary-judgment motion. It did not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.