Zelvin v. BF Mccabe Holdings, Inc.
- John Cronan
- 1:23-cv-09803
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Zelvin v. BF Mccabe, Judge Cronan extended the deadline for a status letter and warned that the case would be dismissed if Zelvin did not respond.
Lynn Zelvin and BF McCabe Holdings, Inc.; the order extended Zelvin’s deadline and warned that the case could be dismissed if he did not comply.
What happened
In Zelvin v. BF Mccabe Holdings, Inc., Lynn Zelvin filed a complaint on behalf of himself and others who were similarly situated. The docket showed that BF McCabe Holdings, Inc. had not been served with the summons and complaint.
The Court had ordered Zelvin to explain why service had not occurred, but the docket showed no response. The Court therefore extended the deadline for Zelvin to file a status letter to February 21, 2024.
Judge John P. Cronan warned that the Court would dismiss the case for failure to prosecute if Zelvin did not meet the extended deadline. The opinion did not dismiss the case at that time.
The detailed version
- Zelvin v. BF Mccabe Holdings, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-09803
- John Cronan
- Feb. 14, 2024
Background
Lynn Zelvin filed the complaint on November 6, 2023, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated. The docket reflected that BF McCabe Holdings, Inc. had never been served with the summons and complaint.
Court’s Action
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) generally requires service of the summons and complaint within 90 days after the complaint is filed. On February 5, 2024, the Court ordered Zelvin to show why the case should not be dismissed because of the failure to serve the defendant. The Court also warned that it could dismiss the case for failure to prosecute if Zelvin did not meet the deadline.
The docket showed no response from Zelvin. The Court extended the deadline for filing the required status letter to February 21, 2024. The Court stated that it would dismiss the case for failure to prosecute if Zelvin again failed to comply. The opinion did not dismiss the case in this order.
Disposition
Judge John P. Cronan extended the status-letter deadline and warned of a possible future dismissal. The order did not state that the case was dismissed, and it did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.