Doe 1 v. Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary

S.D. New York

Doe 1 v. Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided April 18, 2022·No. 1:21-cv-06865·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JANE DOE 1, et al., : Plaintiffs, : : 21-CV-6865 (VSB) -against- : : ORDER CONGREGATION OF THE SACRED : HEARTS OF JESUS AND MARY, et al., : Defendants. :

VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: On April 15, 2022, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). “[W]hen a plaintiff properly amends [a] complaint after a defendant has filed a motion to dismiss that is still pending, the district court has the option of either denying the pending motion as moot or evaluating the motion in light of the facts alleged in the amended complaint.” Pettaway v. Nat’l Recovery Sols., LLC, 955 F.3d 299, 303-04 (2d Cir. 2020). Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED that all Defendants shall file a letter within seven (7) days deciding whether their motion to dismiss should be deemed moot without prejudice to refile a new motion to dismiss in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3), or if I should evaluate Defendants’ current motions to dismiss in light of the facts alleged in the amended complaint. SO ORDERED. Dated: April 18, 2022 ( New York, New York | AMUSO ONY 1g Vernon S. Broderick United States District Judge

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JANE DOE 1, et al., : Plaintiffs, : : 21-CV-6865 (VSB) -against- : : ORDER CONGREGATION OF THE SACRED : HEARTS OF JESUS AND MARY, et al., : Defendants. :

VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: On April 15, 2022, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). “[W]hen a plaintiff properly amends [a] complaint after a defendant has filed a motion to dismiss that is still pending, the district court has the option of either denying the pending motion as moot or evaluating the motion in light of the facts alleged in the amended complaint.” Pettaway v. Nat’l Recovery Sols., LLC, 955 F.3d 299, 303-04 (2d Cir. 2020). Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED that all Defendants shall file a letter within seven (7) days deciding whether their motion to dismiss should be deemed moot without prejudice to refile a new motion to dismiss in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3), or if I should evaluate Defendants’ current motions to dismiss in light of the facts alleged in the amended complaint. SO ORDERED. Dated: April 18, 2022 ( New York, New York | AMUSO ONY 1g Vernon S. Broderick United States District Judge

Doe 1 v. Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

Pincite

Doe 1 v. Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary (Doe 1 v. Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related