Atas v. The New York Times Company
- James Oetken
- 1:22-cv-00853
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Atas v. The New York Times Company, Judge Swain denied another extension, allowed 30 days to amend, and warned judgment would follow if Atas did not comply.
Nadire Atas, who was proceeding without a lawyer, was denied another 45-day extension but received a final 30-day period to file an amended complaint. The action could result in a civil judgment if she did not comply.
What happened
In Atas v. The New York Times Company, Nadire Atas, representing herself, asked for a fourth 45-day extension to file an amended complaint. The court had previously dismissed her complaint but allowed her to amend to provide facts supporting her claims and the court’s authority to hear the case.
The court denied the requested 45-day extension. Because Atas reported health issues, the court gave her one final 30-day period to file an amended complaint. The order said no further extensions would be granted.
Judge Swain directed Atas to file the amended complaint within 30 days and warned that a civil judgment would be entered if she did not. Judge Swain also denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Atas v. The New York Times Company · No. 1:22-cv-00853
- James Oetken
- Sept. 15, 2022
Background
Nadire Atas filed the action without a lawyer. In an earlier order, the court dismissed her complaint but gave her 30 days to file an amended complaint. The court instructed her to provide factual allegations supporting her claims, explain why each defendant was liable for the alleged libel, and identify a basis for the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning its legal authority to hear the case.
The court granted three requests for more time. On August 17, 2022, it gave Atas an additional 45 days and warned that no further extensions would be granted. Atas nevertheless submitted a fourth request for another 45 days on September 14, 2022. The order states that she had had more than three months to comply and that the amendment required factual allegations rather than legal research or legal argument.
Ruling
The court denied Atas’s request for another 45 days. Because Atas alleged health issues, the court granted her an additional 30 days to submit the amended complaint. The court stated that this was the last extension it would grant and directed her to comply with the earlier order within 30 days of the order’s date. If she failed to file an amended complaint by then, a civil judgment would be entered in the action.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addressed the timing and required contents of a possible amended complaint and did not decide the merits of Atas’s claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.