Rivera-Franz v. 167 Avenue B Associates LLC
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:23-cv-02532
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rivera-Franz v. 167 Avenue B Associates, Judge Broderick ordered Plaintiff to show good cause for not serving Defendants before possible dismissal.
The order directly affects Plaintiff Annalisa Rivera-Franz, who must explain the failure to serve Defendants by July 7, 2023. Defendants 167 Avenue B Associates LLC and Hekate’s Hearth Corp. are affected because the case may be dismissed if Rivera-Franz does not comply and show good cause.
What happened
In Rivera-Franz v. 167 Avenue B Associates LLC and Hekate’s Hearth Corp., Annalisa Rivera-Franz sued the two defendants, but the opinion states that she had not filed proof of service or taken other action to move the case forward.
The court ordered Rivera-Franz to submit, by July 7, 2023, a legal letter of no more than three pages explaining why the case should not be dismissed for failure to serve the defendants within 90 days after filing the complaint.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick warned that failing to submit the letter and show good cause would result in dismissal. The order did not itself dismiss the case or decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Rivera-Franz v. 167 Avenue B Associates LLC · No. 1:23-cv-02532
- Vernon Broderick
- June 23, 2023
Background
Annalisa Rivera-Franz filed the action against 167 Avenue B Associates LLC and Hekate’s Hearth Corp. on March 24, 2023. The opinion states that summonses were obtained on March 27, 2023. As of the order, Rivera-Franz had not filed an affidavit of service or taken any other action to prosecute the case.
Order
The court ordered Rivera-Franz to submit a letter of no more than three pages by July 7, 2023. The letter must be supported by legal authority and explain why the case should not be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), which concerns timely service of the summons and complaint.
The court explained that “good cause” generally requires exceptional circumstances beyond the plaintiff’s control. It also stated that courts consider a plaintiff’s diligent attempts to serve process and the prejudice to the defendants caused by delay. The opinion states that an attorney’s inadvertence, neglect, mistake, or misplaced reliance does not constitute good cause.
Disposition
Judge Vernon S. Broderick did not dismiss the case in this order. Instead, he gave Rivera-Franz a deadline to show good cause and warned that failure to submit the letter and demonstrate good cause for not serving the defendants within 90 days after filing the complaint would result in dismissal. The order did not address the merits of the claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.