Hernandez v. Miller
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:22-cv-06964
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hernandez v. Miller, Judge Broderick denied Hernandez’s summary-judgment and settlement-conference motions because the case was not ready for those proceedings.
Caleb S. Hernandez, Larry Miller, Eric Eisbrenner, and the pending federal case. The court denied Hernandez’s motions, found the defendants’ stay motion moot, and terminated the identified motions.
What happened
In Hernandez v. Miller, Caleb S. Hernandez asked the court to partially decide the case in his favor and to schedule a settlement conference.
Larry Miller and Eric Eisbrenner asked the court to pause the summary-judgment motion while it considered motions to dismiss and Hernandez’s request to file a second amended complaint. They also opposed holding a settlement conference.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick denied Hernandez’s summary-judgment motion as premature because the court had not decided which complaint controlled and motions to dismiss were pending. The court said the request to pause the motion was therefore moot and denied the settlement-conference request; it directed the clerk to terminate the three motions.
The detailed version
- Hernandez v. Miller · No. 1:22-cv-06964
- Vernon Broderick
- Nov. 17, 2022
Background
Caleb S. Hernandez moved for partial summary judgment, which asks the court to decide some issues without a trial, and separately moved for a settlement conference. Larry Miller and Eric Eisbrenner asked the court to stay, or pause, the summary-judgment motion while the court resolved their motions to dismiss and Hernandez’s motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. They also opposed a settlement conference.
Court’s reasoning
The court noted that although a party may generally move for summary judgment before discovery closes, courts often deny such motions when discovery on relevant issues is incomplete. Here, Hernandez’s motion to file a second amended complaint was not fully briefed, and motions to dismiss were pending or had briefing paused. The court stated that it was premature to brief summary judgment because it had not yet determined which complaint was the operative pleading—the complaint governing the case—and because motions to dismiss remained pending.
Rulings
Judge Vernon S. Broderick denied Hernandez’s motion for partial summary judgment as premature. Because the summary-judgment motion was denied, the defendants’ motion to stay it was moot. The court also denied Hernandez’s motion for a settlement conference, finding that it would be unproductive given the posture of the case and the defendants’ opposition. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motions at Docs. 68, 72, and 74.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.