Potanovic, Jr. v. Town of Stony Point
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-03293
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Potanovic v. Town of Stony Point, Judge Briccetti ordered plaintiff to choose whether to amend his complaint before the Town’s dismissal motion proceeds.
George Potanovic, Jr. and the Town of Stony Point; the order required Potanovic to choose whether to amend the complaint and set the Town’s options after any amendment.
What happened
Potanovic, Jr. v. Town of Stony Point concerns the Town’s motion to dismiss the complaint, filed on June 16, 2022.
The court ordered George Potanovic, Jr. to notify the court by June 27 whether he would file an amended complaint or rely on the existing complaint. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss or the claims’ merits.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti stated that, if Potanovic chose to amend, he had 14 days after notifying the court to do so. The Town would then have 21 days to answer, move to dismiss the amended complaint, or rely on its original motion.
The detailed version
- Potanovic, Jr. v. Town of Stony Point · No. 7:22-cv-03293
- Vincent Briccetti
- June 17, 2022
Background
The Town of Stony Point moved to dismiss George Potanovic, Jr.’s complaint on June 16, 2022. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
Order
The court ordered Potanovic to notify the court by June 27, 2022, whether he intended to file an amended complaint in response to the motion to dismiss or would rely on the complaint already filed.
If Potanovic chose not to amend, the motion to dismiss would proceed under the regular filing schedule governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Civil Rules, unless the court ordered otherwise. The court also stated that it was unlikely to give Potanovic another opportunity to amend to address deficiencies made apparent by the fully briefed motion arguments.
If Potanovic chose to amend, he had to file the amended complaint no later than 14 days after notifying the court of that choice. Within 21 days after the amendment, the Town could answer, file a motion to dismiss the amended complaint, or notify the court that it would rely on its original motion to dismiss.
Disposition and Effect
The court did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss and did not decide the merits of the complaint. The order instead set deadlines and required Potanovic to choose how to proceed with the complaint.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.