Micheli & Shel, LLC v. Grubhub Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:21-cv-04995
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Micheli & Shel v. Grubhub, Judge Furman granted Postmates’s motion for judgment and dismissed Micheli’s claims while arbitration continued against other defendants.
Micheli & Shel, LLC’s claims against Postmates were dismissed, and Postmates received final judgment. Arbitration proceedings against the other defendants continued.
What happened
In Micheli & Shel, LLC v. Grubhub Inc., the court granted Postmates’s motion for judgment and dismissed Micheli’s claims against Postmates. The judgment states that arbitration proceedings were continuing against the other defendants.
The court declined Micheli’s request to amend the complaint, stating that the defects in the claims were substantive, could not be fixed, and made amendment futile.
Judge Furman entered final judgment for Postmates under Rule 54(b), which permits final judgment on fewer than all claims or parties when there is no just reason to delay. The court also administratively closed the case, allowing a party to seek reopening within 30 days after the arbitration proceedings conclude.
The detailed version
- Micheli & Shel, LLC v. Grubhub Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-04995
- Jesse Furman
- Mar. 7, 2023
Ruling
The court entered judgment in favor of Postmates and dismissed Micheli’s claims against Postmates. The judgment refers to Postmates’s “motion for judgment on the” but the type of judgment motion is incomplete in the provided text. The judgment states that the ruling was based on the court’s March 7, 2023 Memorandum Opinion and Order, which is not included here.
Leave to Amend
The court declined Micheli’s request for permission to amend the complaint. It stated that the defects in Micheli’s claims were substantive and insurmountable, so amendment would be futile—that is, changing the complaint would not cure the problems identified by the court.
Rule 54(b) Judgment and Case Status
Under Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court found no just reason to delay final judgment in Postmates’s favor until the arbitration proceedings against the other defendants concluded. It therefore entered judgment for Postmates. The court also administratively closed the case, without prejudice to a party filing a letter motion to reopen it within 30 days after the arbitration proceedings conclude.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.