Lenzo v. City of New York
- Jesse Furman
- 1:21-cv-00306
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Lenzo v. City of New York, Judge Furman granted the City’s motion to dismiss, denied leave to amend, and closed the case.
Tory Lenzo and the City of New York; the case was closed with judgment in favor of the City.
What happened
In Lenzo v. City of New York, the City moved to dismiss Lenzo’s complaint. The judgment refers to an earlier complaint and a later amended complaint, but the provided text does not describe the underlying claims.
The court granted the motion to dismiss. It denied Lenzo leave to amend because it found substantive problems with the claims, Lenzo did not request another amendment, and the court had previously warned that he would not receive another opportunity to amend. Judgment was entered for the City, and the case was closed.
Judge Jesse Furman is identified as the judge. The judgment is dated March 4, 2022, and the provided text does not include the separate memorandum explaining the underlying dismissal in detail.
The detailed version
- Lenzo v. City of New York · No. 1:21-cv-00306
- Jesse Furman
- Mar. 4, 2022
Background
The provided document is a judgment in favor of the City of New York. It refers to Lenzo’s original complaint, a later complaint, and a prior order that allowed Lenzo to amend. The text provided does not identify the claims or explain the factual allegations.
Ruling
The court granted the City’s motion to dismiss. It denied Lenzo leave to amend the complaint. The judgment states that the problems with Lenzo’s claims were substantive and that amendment would therefore be futile. It also states that Lenzo neither requested leave to amend nor identified facts that would cure the pleading problems. In addition, the court had previously warned that Lenzo would not receive another opportunity to amend to address issues raised by the motion to dismiss.
Disposition
Judgment was entered in favor of the City, and the case was closed. The provided judgment does not use the phrase “with prejudice” or “without prejudice.” The separate memorandum opinion and order cited in the judgment is not included, so the specific legal basis for dismissing Lenzo’s claims cannot be summarized from this text alone.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.