Reid v. Brandefy, Inc.
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:23-cv-00711
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Reid v. Brandefy, Inc., Judge Netburn ordered Reid to explain service and warned that the case may be dismissed without prejudice.
Nadreca Reid and Brandefy, Inc.; the order requires Reid to address whether Brandefy was served and warns that the case may be dismissed if service was untimely without good cause.
What happened
In Reid v. Brandefy, Inc., Nadreca Reid filed a complaint against Brandefy, Inc. The opinion says the complaint was filed on January 27, 2023.
The court said Reid had to deliver the lawsuit papers to Brandefy within 90 days after the summons was issued, which meant the deadline was April 30, 2023. The docket did not show that Brandefy had been served by then.
The court ordered Reid to send a letter explaining whether she served Brandefy and, if not, why she did not. Judge Sarah Netburn warned that the court may dismiss the case without prejudice if Reid did not serve Brandefy on time and could not show a legally sufficient reason for the delay.
The detailed version
- Reid v. Brandefy, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-00711
- Paul Gardephe
- May 4, 2023
Background
Nadreca Reid filed a complaint against Brandefy, Inc. on January 27, 2023. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) generally requires a plaintiff to serve the defendant with the summons and complaint within 90 days after the summons is issued. The court stated that Reid's service deadline was April 30, 2023.
Issue
The docket did not show that Reid had served Brandefy by the deadline. The court therefore required Reid to explain whether service had occurred and, if it had not, why she had failed to serve Brandefy.
Ruling
The court ordered Reid to submit a letter addressing service. It warned that, if Reid had not served Brandefy within the required time and could not establish good cause—a legally sufficient reason—for the failure, the court may dismiss the case without prejudice. The order did not dismiss the case at that time.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.