Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 15, 2023

Slade v. Offlimits, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:23-cv-01152
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Slade v. Offlimits, Inc., Judge Caproni dismissed the case without prejudice because Slade did not adequately allege standing.

Who this affects

Linda Slade and Offlimits, Inc.; the case was closed without prejudice, and neither party was assessed costs or attorneys' fees.

What happened

In Slade v. Offlimits, Inc., Linda Slade sued Offlimits, Inc., individually and on behalf of similarly situated people. The court had previously ordered Slade to seek permission to file an amended complaint by May 12, 2023, or the case would be dismissed for lack of standing.

Slade did not respond to that order. Instead, she told the court that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues and asked the court to keep the case open for 45 days while they prepared settlement documents and a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice.

Because Slade did not file an amended complaint adequately alleging standing, the court said it lacked authority to hear the case. Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case without prejudice and without costs, canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, terminated open motions, and closed the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Slade v. Offlimits, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-01152
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
May 15, 2023

Background

Linda Slade brought the action individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons against Offlimits, Inc. On May 8, 2023, the court ordered Slade to seek permission to file an amended complaint no later than May 12, 2023. The court warned that the action would be dismissed for lack of standing if she did not do so.

Events Before the Ruling

Slade did not respond to the order to show cause. She instead notified the court that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. She asked the court to retain jurisdiction for 45 days while the parties prepared settlement documents and a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice.

Ruling

The court concluded that Slade had not filed an amended complaint adequately alleging standing. As a result, the court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning authority to hear the case. The court ordered that all scheduled conferences and other deadlines be canceled, dismissed the case without prejudice and without costs, including attorneys' fees, directed the Clerk of Court to terminate all open motions, and closed the case. The order was entered by United States District Judge Valerie Caproni.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.