Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 17, 2024

Lipsitz v. Harel

Judge
Sidney Stein
Docket
1:24-cv-00146
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Lipsitz v. Harel, Judge Torres denied defendants’ dismissal request without prejudice and dismissed their counterclaim without prejudice.

Who this affects

The order affected Plaintiff Chaim Lipsitz and Defendants Shneior Harel and Natalie Aballi by denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss without prejudice, dismissing their counterclaim without prejudice to renewal, and setting a response deadline.

What happened

In Lipsitz v. Harel, the defendants asked to file a motion to dismiss the complaint and filed that motion and a counterclaim. The court found that their request did not follow the court’s required process.

The court denied the defendants’ pre-motion letter request and motion to dismiss without prejudice to refiling. It also dismissed the counterclaim without prejudice to renewal because a counterclaim must be included in a proper pleading, not filed separately or as part of a motion to dismiss.

Judge Analisa Torres directed the defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by January 31, 2024, and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion filed at ECF No. 6.

The detailed version

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

Case
Lipsitz v. Harel · No. 1:24-cv-00146
Judge
Sidney Stein
Date
Jan. 17, 2024

Background

On January 16, 2024, Defendants Shneior Harel and Natalie Aballi filed a pre-motion letter seeking permission to file a motion to dismiss the complaint. They also filed the motion to dismiss and a counterclaim against Plaintiff Chaim Lipsitz.

Motion to Dismiss

The court’s Individual Rules required a party seeking to file a motion to dismiss to exchange letters with opposing counsel before submitting a pre-motion letter to the court. The defendants did not complete that required exchange. They also filed their motion to dismiss before the court reviewed and ruled on their pre-motion letter.

The court therefore denied the defendants’ letter request and motion to dismiss without prejudice to refiling.

Counterclaim

The court explained that counterclaims must be included in a pleading under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 13. A motion to dismiss is not a pleading, and a party may not file a standalone counterclaim as its own pleading. The court therefore dismissed the counterclaim without prejudice to renewal.

Other Directions and Disposition

The court ordered the defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by January 31, 2024, in accordance with the court’s Individual Rules. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at ECF No. 6.

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.