Shiplane Transport, Inc. v. HWY 31 Exchange Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:23-cv-10073
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Shiplane Transport v. HWY 31 Exchange, Judge Caproni granted the defendants’ request to indefinitely postpone the initial pretrial conference.
The order affected the parties and the initial pretrial conference scheduled for March 8, 2024.
What happened
Shiplane Transport, Inc. v. HWY 31 Exchange Inc. involved the defendants’ request to postpone an initial pretrial conference scheduled for March 8, 2024. The request was based on a pending motion challenging personal jurisdiction, venue, and the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claims.
The defendants asked the court to postpone the conference until after ruling on that motion, or alternatively to allow their lawyer to attend by telephone. The plaintiff’s lawyer stated that the plaintiff did not oppose the alternative request but did not state whether the plaintiff opposed postponement itself.
Judge Valerie Caproni granted the application and adjourned the initial pretrial conference indefinitely, without setting a new date. The order did not decide the pending motion to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Shiplane Transport, Inc. v. HWY 31 Exchange Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-10073
- Valerie Caproni
- Feb. 28, 2024
Background
The defendants—Hwy 31 Exchange Inc., Mark Anthony Hafner, and Tania Renee Oropesa—asked the court to postpone the initial pretrial conference, which was scheduled for March 8, 2024. The request cited a pending motion to dismiss based on lack of personal jurisdiction, lack of venue, and failure to state a claim.
The defendants argued that resolving the pending motion first could avoid unnecessary time, expense, and use of judicial resources because the motion could result in dismissal or transfer of the case. They proposed rescheduling the conference for the third Friday after the court ruled on the motion. Alternatively, they asked to participate in the scheduled conference by telephone. The plaintiff’s lawyer stated that the plaintiff was not opposed to the alternative request but did not state whether the plaintiff opposed postponement itself.
Ruling
Judge Caproni granted the application. The court adjourned the initial pretrial conference “sine die,” meaning indefinitely and without setting a new date. This order addressed only the conference request; the opinion does not rule on the pending motion to dismiss.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.