Columbo v. Philips Bryant Park LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:22-cv-00775
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Columbo v. Philips Bryant Park LLC: Judge Abrams granted Columbo more time to file his submission but said new arguments would not be considered.
Philip Columbo received additional time to file his letter; the defendants were given until November 17, 2023, to reply.
What happened
In Columbo v. Philips Bryant Park LLC, Philip Columbo asked for more time to submit additional support opposing the defendants’ partial motion to dismiss. He also said he was waiting for the defendants’ response before preparing a joint letter about possible mediation.
The court granted Columbo’s request for additional time to file his letter. The order does not state that the court decided the partial motion to dismiss.
Judge Ronnie Abrams set November 17, 2023, as the deadline for the defendants to reply and warned that the court would not consider arguments Columbo had not previously made.
The detailed version
- Columbo v. Philips Bryant Park LLC · No. 1:22-cv-00775
- Ronnie Abrams
- Nov. 3, 2023
Background
Philip Columbo’s attorney asked for an extension of the November 6, 2023 deadline to submit additional support for Columbo’s opposition to the defendants’ collective partial motion to dismiss. The request sought an extension through November 10, 2023. The attorney also stated that the parties were conferring about a possible referral to mediation and that a joint letter would be submitted after receiving the defendants’ response.
Ruling
The court granted the application as to Columbo’s request for additional time to file his letter. The court clarified that it would not consider any new arguments that Columbo had not previously made. The court allowed the defendants to reply to Columbo’s submission by November 17, 2023.
What the Order Did Not Decide
This order addressed scheduling and the contents of Columbo’s submission. It did not decide the defendants’ partial motion to dismiss or the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.