Hector v. Johnson
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-05990
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Hector v. Johnson, Judge Briccetti ordered John Hector to choose whether to amend his complaint before defendants’ dismissal motion proceeds.
John Hector and the defendants who moved to dismiss the amended complaint, particularly Kathleen Hector, Jeanine Hector, Edward Guthrie, and Raymond Johnson.
What happened
In Hector v. Johnson, defendants Kathleen Hector, Jeanine Hector, Edward Guthrie, and Raymond Johnson moved to dismiss John Hector’s amended complaint.
The court gave John Hector until December 16, 2022, to say whether he would file a second amended complaint or rely on the complaint challenged by the motion.
Judge Briccetti said the dismissal motion would proceed if John Hector did not amend, and set deadlines for any amendment and the defendants’ response. The court did not decide the motion to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Hector v. Johnson · No. 7:22-cv-05990
- Vincent Briccetti
- Dec. 6, 2022
Background
On December 5, 2022, Kathleen Hector, Jeanine Hector, Edward Guthrie, and Raymond Johnson moved to dismiss John Hector’s amended complaint. The caption also lists Does 1 through 5 as defendants.
Order
The court ordered John Hector to notify the court by letter no later than December 16, 2022, whether he intended to file a second amended complaint in response to the motion or would rely on the complaint under challenge.
If John Hector chose not to amend, the motion to dismiss would proceed under the regular schedule. The court stated that it was unlikely to give him another opportunity to amend to address deficiencies revealed by the fully briefed motion. The deadlines for opposing and reply papers would be governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the court’s local rules unless the court ordered otherwise.
If John Hector chose to amend, he had to file the amended complaint within 14 days after notifying the court. Within 21 days after the amendment, the defendants could answer, move to dismiss the amended complaint, or notify the court that they were relying on the original motion to dismiss.
Disposition
This order did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss and did not resolve the allegations’ legal sufficiency. It set a choice and deadlines concerning a possible further amendment. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti signed the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.