Cunningham v. Does

321 F. App'x 92
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedApril 16, 2009
DocketNo. 07-4006-cv
StatusPublished

This text of 321 F. App'x 92 (Cunningham v. Does) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cunningham v. Does, 321 F. App'x 92 (2d Cir. 2009).

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

This is an appeal by the Plaintiff from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Batts, J.) dismissing the complaint [93]*93with prejudice. The district court dismissed the complaint with prejudice by reason of the court’s finding that Plaintiffs counsel had failed to perfect service of process on the Defendants. While the appeal was pending, this Court received a written communication from the district court advising that the district court was not aware of all the pertinent facts when it dismissed the complaint and that “the Court agrees” with Plaintiff that “the Court was in error in dismissing this case with prejudice.” The district court suggested that this Court vacate the district court’s order of dismissal of July 18, 2007 and reinstate the case on the district court’s docket.

We have considered the arguments of Plaintiff and Defendants and agree that it was error to dismiss the case with prejudice. See Dodson v. Runyon, 86 F.3d 37 (2d Cir.1996).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is VACATED and the ease is REMANDED for further proceedings.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
321 F. App'x 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cunningham-v-does-ca2-2009.