Michael Eannazzo, et al. v. The Village of Elmsford, New York, et al.

S.D. New York

Michael Eannazzo, et al. v. The Village of Elmsford, New York, et al.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 14, 2026·No. 7:25-cv-09585·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MICHAEL EANNAZZO, et al., Plaintiffs, -against- 25-CV-9585 (JGLC) THE VILLAGE OF ELMSFORD, NEW YORK, et ORDER al., □ Defendants.

JESSICA G. L. CLARKE, United States District Judge: Defendants have moved to dismiss the claims against Bleakley Platt & Schmidt, LLP, Michael Starvaggi, and Lino Sciaretta (the "Attorney Defendants"). ECF No. 11. They have not, however, answered the claims against the remaining Defendants. "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(4) provides that service of a Rule 12 motion suspends the movant's time to file a responsive pleading until fourteen days after the court issues a decision on the motion." /n re Am. Express Anti-Steering Rules Antitrust Litig., 343 F. Supp. 3d 94, 98 (E.D.N.Y. 2018). Although Rule 12(a)(4) "does not explicitly contemplate the filing of a partial motion to dismiss," id., and few courts in this Circuit have addressed "whether the filing of a partial motion to dismiss automatically delays a defendant's requirement to answer a complaint's remaining claims,” Alvarez v. Bause, No. 22-CV-186 (LEK) (ATB), 2023 WL 1765415, at *8 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 3, 2023), the Court finds that Defendants need not answer the remaining claims until 14 days after the Court rules on their partial motion to dismiss.

Dated: January 14, 2026 New York, New York SO ORDERED. o™ { / 4 © \earica Lharke

JESSICA G. L. CLARKE 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 MICHAEL EANNAZZO, et al., Plaintiffs, -against- 25-CV-9585 (JGLC) THE VILLAGE OF ELMSFORD, NEW YORK, et ORDER al., □ Defendants.

JESSICA G. L. CLARKE, United States District Judge: Defendants have moved to dismiss the claims against Bleakley Platt & Schmidt, LLP, Michael Starvaggi, and Lino Sciaretta (the "Attorney Defendants"). ECF No. 11. They have not, however, answered the claims against the remaining Defendants. "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(4) provides that service of a Rule 12 motion suspends the movant's time to file a responsive pleading until fourteen days after the court issues a decision on the motion." /n re Am. Express Anti-Steering Rules Antitrust Litig., 343 F. Supp. 3d 94, 98 (E.D.N.Y. 2018). Although Rule 12(a)(4) "does not explicitly contemplate the filing of a partial motion to dismiss," id., and few courts in this Circuit have addressed "whether the filing of a partial motion to dismiss automatically delays a defendant's requirement to answer a complaint's remaining claims,” Alvarez v. Bause, No. 22-CV-186 (LEK) (ATB), 2023 WL 1765415, at *8 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 3, 2023), the Court finds that Defendants need not answer the remaining claims until 14 days after the Court rules on their partial motion to dismiss.

JESSICA G. L. CLARKE United States District Judge

Michael Eannazzo, et al. v. The Village of Elmsford, New York, et al., (S.D.N.Y. 2026).

Pincite

Michael Eannazzo, et al. v. The Village of Elmsford, New York, et al. (Michael Eannazzo, et al. v. The Village of Elmsford, New York, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related