Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 1, 2023

Smith v. Tishman

Judge
Stewart Aaron
Docket
1:21-cv-02915
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Smith v. Tishman: Judge Aaron granted Smith’s motion to amend his complaint and directed filing of the proposed amended complaint and answer.

Who this affects

Stewart M. Smith and the defendants, including AECOM Tishman, were affected by the amendment and docket-filing directions.

What happened

In Stewart M. Smith v. AECOM Tishman et al., Smith asked to amend his complaint and submitted a proposed amended complaint on June 15, 2023. The defendants responded on July 31, but their filing was actually an answer to the proposed amended complaint.

The court granted Smith’s motion to amend. It directed the clerk to file the proposed amended complaint as a new docket entry and then file the defendants’ response as an answer.

United States Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron also stated that the timeline section of an earlier filing was not part of the amended complaint. The order was dated August 1, 2023.

The detailed version

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

Case
Smith v. Tishman · No. 1:21-cv-02915
Judge
Stewart Aaron
Date
Aug. 1, 2023

Background

On June 15, 2023, Stewart M. Smith filed a motion to amend the complaint and included a proposed amended complaint. On July 31, 2023, the defendants filed a response that the court characterized as an answer to the proposed amended complaint.

Ruling

The court granted Smith’s motion to amend. It directed the clerk to file the proposed amended complaint as a new docket entry titled “Amended Complaint” and to file the defendants’ response as a later docket entry titled “Answer.”

The court also agreed with the defendants that the “timeline” portion of an earlier filing was not part of the amended complaint. The court stated that the amended complaint begins after the heading “Exhibit A.” The order was signed by United States Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron, who noted that a magistrate judge’s grant of a motion to amend a complaint is generally considered non-dispositive.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.