347 Townhouse, LLC v. Citibank, N.A.
- Rochon
- 1:19-cv-00542
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In 347 Townhouse v. Citibank, Judge Rochon ordered the parties to update the court by January 29, 2023, without deciding the pending motion to dismiss.
The plaintiffs, 347 Townhouse, LLC and the other plaintiffs identified in the case caption, and Citibank, N.A.; the order requires the parties to provide a status update.
What happened
In 347 Townhouse, LLC v. Citibank, N.A., the parties told the court that the Second Circuit had decided a related case and jointly requested more time to provide an update.
The court had previously terminated Citibank’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint while awaiting that decision. The parties sought additional time because further petitions might be filed in the related case.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered the parties to update the court about the status of this case by January 29, 2023. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss or the underlying dispute.
The detailed version
- 347 Townhouse, LLC v. Citibank, N.A. · No. 1:19-cv-00542
- Rochon
- Sept. 30, 2022
Background
The court received the parties’ joint letter dated September 29, 2022. The letter responded to the court’s September 15, 2022 reassignment order and informed the court that the Second Circuit had decided Cantero v. Bank of America, N.A.
Motion Status
Citibank’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint had been terminated while the related Second Circuit case was being resolved, subject to reinstatement after a decision issued. Although the Second Circuit had issued its decision, the parties jointly requested additional time to provide an update and address possible reinstatement of the motion because further petitions might be filed in the Second Circuit or the United States Supreme Court.
Ruling
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered the parties to update the court about the status of the case no later than January 29, 2023. The order did not reinstate or decide the motion to dismiss and did not resolve the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.