Johnson v. City of Newburgh
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-04450
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Johnson v. City of Newburgh, Judge Briccetti ordered the plaintiff to choose between amending his complaint and proceeding against defendants’ dismissal motions.
The plaintiff and the City of Newburgh, Anthony Geraci, Kevin Jodice, and The Mid Hudson News were affected by the deadlines and filing options in the order.
What happened
In Johnson v. City of Newburgh, the Mid Hudson News moved to dismiss the only claim brought against it, and the City of Newburgh, Anthony Geraci, and Kevin Jodice filed a partial motion to dismiss.
The court ordered the plaintiff to notify it by August 5, 2022, whether he would file an amended complaint or rely on the existing complaint. If he amended, he had to file it within 14 days after notifying the court. The defendants would then have 21 days to answer, move to dismiss the amended complaint, or state that they would rely on their original motions.
Judge Briccetti did not decide the dismissal motions. The order set deadlines and warned that the plaintiff might not receive another chance to amend if he chose to proceed with the current complaint.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. City of Newburgh · No. 7:22-cv-04450
- Vincent Briccetti
- July 28, 2022
Background
The plaintiff sued the City of Newburgh, Chief Police Anthony Geraci, Police Officer Kevin Jodice, and The Mid Hudson News. The opinion states that The Mid Hudson News moved to dismiss the sole count against it on June 30, 2022. On July 27, 2022, the City of Newburgh, Geraci, and Jodice filed a partial motion to dismiss.
Order
The court ordered the plaintiff to notify the court by August 5, 2022, whether he intended to file an amended complaint in response to the motions or would rely on the complaint already subject to those motions. If the plaintiff chose not to amend, the motions would proceed under the ordinary schedule. The court also stated that it was unlikely to grant another opportunity to amend to address deficiencies identified by the fully briefed motions.
If the plaintiff chose to amend, the court required him to file the amended complaint no later than 14 days after notifying the court of that choice. Within 21 days after the amendment, the defendants could answer, file a motion to dismiss the amended complaint, or notify the court by letter that they would rely on their initially filed motions. The order stated that the deadlines for opposition and reply papers would follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Civil Rules unless the court ordered otherwise.
Disposition and significance
This order did not grant or deny either motion to dismiss and did not decide the merits of the claims. It directed the plaintiff to choose between amending the complaint and proceeding on the existing complaint. Judge Briccetti signed the order as a United States District Judge.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.