Shamilov v. City of New York
- Laura Swain
- 1:20-cv-10224
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Shamilov v. City of New York, Judge Abrams stayed discovery while defendants’ motion to dismiss remained pending and set response deadlines.
Aleksandr Shamilov, the City of New York, and the New York City Department of Finance; discovery in the lawsuit was paused, and Shamilov received deadlines to respond to or amend his complaint.
What happened
In Shamilov v. City of New York, the defendants asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit. The order did not decide that motion.
The court directed Shamilov to respond within 30 days. It also informed him that he could amend his complaint once without permission within 21 days after the motion was served.
Judge Ronnie Abrams stayed discovery until the court decides the motion to dismiss and said it would schedule an initial status conference if the case continues. The defendants were ordered to email Shamilov a copy of the order.
The detailed version
- Shamilov v. City of New York · No. 1:20-cv-10224
- Laura Swain
- June 25, 2021
Background
Aleksandr Shamilov sued the City of New York and the New York City Department of Finance. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
Directions to the Plaintiff
The court directed Shamilov to respond to the motion within 30 days of the order. It also informed him that, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, he could amend his complaint once as a matter of course within 21 days after service of the defendants’ motion. The order mentioned a legal clinic for people representing themselves, but stated that the clinic is not part of or run by the court.
Discovery Stay and Disposition
Based on its initial review of the motion to dismiss, the court found good cause to stay discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). Discovery was therefore stayed until the court decides the motion. If the case proceeds after that decision, the court said it would schedule an initial status conference. The defendants were directed to email Shamilov a copy of the order. The order did not rule on the motion to dismiss itself.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.