Arriaga v. Otaiza

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedNovember 19, 2021
Docket7:20-cv-06992
StatusUnknown

This text of Arriaga v. Otaiza (Arriaga v. Otaiza) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arriaga v. Otaiza, (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANTHONYARRIAGA, SSS

Plaintiff, 20 CIVIL 6902 (PMH) -against- JUDGMENT JOANA OTAIZA, et al., Defendants. wane eee KX It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated November 19, 2021, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED. While “[d]istrict courts should frequently provide leave to amend before dismissing a pro se complaint . . . leave to amend is not necessary when it would be futile.” Reed v. Friedman Mgmt. Corp., 541 F. App’x 40, 41 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000)). In this case, the Complaint is dismissed with prejudice because any amendment would be futile; accordingly, this case is closed.

Dated: New York, New York November 19, 2021

RUBY J. KRAJICK Clerk of Courf77 BY: D □□ ml we

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Reed v. Friedman Mgmt. Corp.
541 F. App'x 40 (Second Circuit, 2013)
Cuoco v. Moritsugu
222 F.3d 99 (Second Circuit, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Arriaga v. Otaiza, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arriaga-v-otaiza-nysd-2021.