Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 11, 2022

Norris v. Reamir 57 Corp.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:21-cv-02427
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Norris v. Reamir 57 Corp., Judge Nathan ordered Norris to pursue default judgment or explain why it should not proceed.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, Norris, and defendants Reamir 57 Corp. and 508 Columbus Properties LLC.

What happened

In Norris v. Reamir 57 Corp., 508 Columbus Properties LLC had received more time to answer, but the court had not received its answer, and Reamir 57 Corp. had not appeared.

The court ordered Norris, within two weeks, either to seek a certificate of default and ask for default judgment against the defendants or to file a status update explaining why that motion should not be filed yet. Norris also had to serve the order on the defendants by March 18, 2022, and file proof of service.

Judge Alison J. Nathan warned that failing to meet the deadline could result in dismissal of Norris’s claim for failure to prosecute.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Norris v. Reamir 57 Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-02427
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Mar. 11, 2022

Background

On January 21, 2022, the court granted Defendant 508 Columbus Properties LLC a 30-day extension to file an answer. As of March 11, the court had not received that answer. Defendant Reamir 57 Corp. had not appeared.

Court’s Order

The court directed the plaintiff, within two weeks, to do one of two things: (1) seek a certificate of default and move for default judgment against the defendants under the court’s individual practices, or (2) file a status update explaining why a motion for default judgment should not be filed at that time.

The plaintiff also had to serve the order on the defendants by March 18, 2022, and file proof of service on the court’s electronic filing system. The court warned that failure to comply could result in dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward.

Disposition and Effect

The order did not grant default judgment or dismiss the claim. It required the plaintiff to take the specified next steps and warned of a possible dismissal if the plaintiff failed to do so. Judge Alison J. Nathan issued the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.