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 and set an October 15 deadline to amend the complaint.
Nadire Atas, who was representing herself, was denied additional time and was required to file an amended complaint by October 15, 2022. The action's defendants would be affected by whether the case continued after that filing.
What happened
In Atas v. The New York Times Company, Nadire Atas was given time to file an amended complaint after the court dismissed her original complaint. She had already received three extensions and then requested a fourth 45-day extension.
The court had denied that fourth request but gave Atas 30 more days, warning that no further extensions would be granted. Atas then requested a fifth extension of 45 days.
Judge Swain denied the request and directed Atas to file her amended complaint by October 15, 2022. The court stated that a civil judgment would be entered if she missed that deadline and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fees.
The detailed version
- Atas v. The New York Times Company · No. 1:22-cv-00853
- James Oetken
- Oct. 5, 2022
Background
Nadire Atas filed the action without a lawyer. In an earlier order, the court dismissed her complaint but allowed her 30 days to file an amended complaint that established the court's authority to hear the case, stated her claims briefly and clearly, and alleged facts showing why each defendant was responsible for the alleged libel. The court granted three later requests for more time.
On September 14, 2022, Atas requested a fourth 45-day extension. On September 15, the court denied that request, allowed her 30 additional days to file, and stated that this was the last extension. The court warned that a civil judgment would be entered if she did not file by October 15, 2022. Atas then submitted a fifth request for another 45-day extension.
Ruling
The court denied Atas's request for another 45 days and directed her to file the amended complaint by October 15, 2022, in compliance with the earlier order. The court stated that a civil judgment would be entered if she failed to meet that deadline. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fees. This order decided the extension request; it did not address the merits of the alleged libel claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.