Senior v. Keep Healthy, Inc.
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:22-cv-07064
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Senior v. Keep Healthy, Judge Broderick ordered the defendant to choose how to proceed with its pending dismissal motion.
Frank Senior and Keep Healthy, Inc.; the order specifically required Keep Healthy, Inc. to state how it wanted to proceed with its pending motion to dismiss.
What happened
In Senior v. Keep Healthy, Inc., Frank Senior filed an amended complaint on December 9, 2022, while Keep Healthy, Inc.’s motion to dismiss was still pending.
The court explained that, after a proper amendment, it could either treat the pending motion as no longer applicable or evaluate it using the amended complaint’s allegations. The opinion does not decide whether the complaint should be dismissed.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered Keep Healthy, Inc. to file a letter within seven days stating whether it wanted the motion treated as moot without prejudice to filing a new motion, or whether the court should evaluate the existing motion based on the amended complaint.
The detailed version
- Senior v. Keep Healthy, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-07064
- Vernon Broderick
- Dec. 12, 2022
Background
On December 9, 2022, Frank Senior filed an amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). Keep Healthy, Inc. had already filed a motion to dismiss, and that motion remained pending.
Court’s Analysis
The court relied on the rule that, when a plaintiff properly amends a complaint while a motion to dismiss is pending, the court may either deny the pending motion as moot or evaluate the motion based on the allegations in the amended complaint. Treating a motion as moot means the court would no longer decide that motion. The defendant could then choose whether to file a new motion under the applicable federal rule.
Order
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered Keep Healthy, Inc. to file a letter within seven days stating which option it preferred: that the current motion to dismiss be deemed moot without prejudice to filing a new motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3), or that the court evaluate the current motion in light of the amended complaint. The order did not rule on the merits of the motion to dismiss or the amended complaint.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.