Kelsey v. Kessel
- Philip Halpern
- 7:22-cv-03774
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Kelsey v. Kessel, Judge Halpern granted dismissal and dismissed Kelsey's Second Amended Complaint with prejudice under the Eleventh Amendment.
The plaintiff's claims were dismissed with prejudice, and the case was closed; the defendant obtained dismissal of the Second Amended Complaint.
What happened
In Kelsey v. Kessel, the defendant asked the court to dismiss the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. The judgment gives no further description of the underlying claims.
The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss. It ruled that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the Eleventh Amendment, which limits certain lawsuits against states and state-related defendants. The court also said the plaintiff had already received multiple opportunities to amend the complaint.
Judge Halpern's judgment dismissed the Second Amended Complaint with prejudice, meaning the complaint cannot be refiled in that form. The court stated that any further amendment would be futile and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Kelsey v. Kessel · No. 7:22-cv-03774
- Philip Halpern
- Mar. 8, 2024
Background
The judgment concerns Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint against Defendant Brittney Kessel. The judgment does not describe the underlying claims or the events giving rise to them. Defendant moved to dismiss.
Ruling
The court granted Defendant's motion to dismiss. It stated that Plaintiff's claims were barred by the Eleventh Amendment. That amendment generally restricts certain suits against states and state-related defendants, but the judgment does not provide additional detail about the basis for applying it here.
The court also relied on Plaintiff's prior opportunities to amend the pleading. It stated that Plaintiff had received multiple opportunities to amend and had been given notice of deficiencies in the pleading. The court concluded that any further amendment would be futile and that leave to replead was properly denied.
Disposition
The court dismissed Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint with prejudice and stated that the case was closed. The judgment is dated March 8, 2024.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.