Taylor v. Hudson Valley Automotive Enterprises, L.L.C.
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-07329
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Taylor v. HV Cars, LLC, Judge Briccetti ordered Susan Taylor to choose whether to amend her complaint before the dismissal motion proceeds.
Susan Taylor and HV Cars, LLC; the order governed whether Taylor would amend her complaint and how HV Cars’s pending dismissal motion would proceed.
What happened
In Taylor v. HV Cars, LLC, defendant moved to dismiss Susan Taylor’s amended class-action complaint. The court had not yet decided that motion.
The court ordered Taylor to notify it by May 5, 2021, whether she would file a second amended complaint or rely on the existing complaint. If she chose to amend, she had 14 days after notifying the court to file the new complaint.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also set the defendant’s options after any second amendment: answer, file a new dismissal motion, or rely on its original motion. The order was dated April 23, 2021.
The detailed version
- Taylor v. Hudson Valley Automotive Enterprises, L.L.C. · No. 7:20-cv-07329
- Vincent Briccetti
- Apr. 23, 2021
Background
On April 22, 2021, HV Cars, LLC moved to dismiss Susan Taylor’s amended class-action complaint. The order did not decide whether the complaint stated a valid claim and did not rule on the dismissal motion.
Court’s Order
The court ordered Taylor to notify the court by May 5, 2021, whether she intended to file a second amended complaint in response to the motion or would rely on the amended complaint already under review.
If Taylor chose not to file a second amended complaint, the dismissal motion would proceed under the ordinary schedule. The court stated that it was unlikely to give Taylor another opportunity to amend based on deficiencies revealed by the fully briefed motion.
If Taylor chose to amend, she had to file the second amended complaint no later than 14 days after notifying the court. Within 21 days after that amendment, HV Cars could file an answer, file a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, or notify the court that it would rely on its original dismissal motion. The timing for opposition and reply papers would otherwise follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the court’s local rules.
Disposition and Significance
The court entered a case-management order concerning amendment of the complaint and the pending motion to dismiss. It did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss. The order was signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on April 23, 2021.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.