Milhouse v. Morgan and Morgan P.A.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided May 20, 2024·No. 1:23-cv-07016·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MUHAMMAD MILHOUSE, Plaintiff, 23-CV-7016 (LTS) -against- ORDER MORGAN & MORGAN PLLC, et al., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who resides on Staten Island, New York, filed this action pro se. On October 27, 2023, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Plaintiff and Defendants are not of diverse citizenship. Plaintiff asserted state-law breach-of- contract claims and named a Florida law firm, Defendant Morgan & Morgan PLLC, as well as New York State attorneys. The Court granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint “to drop dispensable nondiverse defendants whose presence would defeat diversity of citizenship.” Jaser v. New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Ass’n, 815 F.2d 240, 243 (2d Cir. 1987). On November 22, 2023, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint and named nondiverse defendants. Accordingly, on March 18, 2024, the Court dismissed the amended complaint, and the Clerk of Court entered judgment on March 20, 2024. On March 27, 2024, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration challenging the March 18, 2024 dismissal order. He argues that he and Defendant Morgan & Morgan PLLC are diverse and appears to seek leave to bring his claims only against Morgan & Morgan. The Court liberally construes this submission as a motion for relief from a judgment or order under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006); see also Tracy v. Freshwater, 623 F.3d 90, 101 (2d Cir. 2010) (The solicitude afforded to pro se litigants takes a variety of forms, including liberal construction of papers, “relaxation of the limitations on the amendment of pleadings,” leniency in the enforcement of other procedural rules, and “deliberate, continuing efforts to ensure that a pro se litigant understands what is required of him”) (citations omitted). Because Plaintiff asserts that he seeks to bring claims against Morgan & Morgan, the Court grants Plaintiff’s motion.

CONCLUSION Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF 12) is granted. The Court directs the Clerk of Court to vacate the order of dismissal and the civil judgment (ECF 10-11). Within 30 days of receiving this order, Plaintiff must file a second amended complaint and name Morgan & Morgan as the sole defendant. He also must set forth his claims against this defendant and state facts showing that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, as required under the diversity statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332. If Plaintiff does not file a second amended complaint within the time allowed, the Court will dismiss the amended complaint. A second amended complaint form is attached to this order. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would

not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. Dated: May 20, 2024 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Write the full name of each plaintiff. CV (Include case number if one has been assigned) -against- SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Do you want a jury trial? Ll1Yes LINo

Write the full name of each defendant. If you need more space, please write “see attached” in the space above and attach an additional sheet of paper with the full list of names. The names listed above must be identical to those contained in Section Il.

NOTICE The public can access electronic court files. For privacy and security reasons, papers filed with the court should therefore not contain: an individual’s full social security number or full birth date; the full name of a person known to be a minor; or a complete financial account number. A filing may include only: the last four digits of a social security number; the year of an individual’s birth; a minor’s initials; and the last four digits of a financial account number. See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2.

Rev. 1/9/17

I. BASIS FOR JURISDICTION Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction (limited power). Generally, only two types of cases can be heard in federal court: cases involving a federal question and cases involving diversity of citizenship of the parties. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, a case arising under the United States Constitution or federal laws or treaties is a federal question case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a case in which a citizen of one State sues a citizen of another State or nation, and the amount in controversy is more than $75,000, is a diversity case. In a diversity case, no defendant may be a citizen of the same State as any plaintiff. What is the basis for federal-court jurisdiction in your case? Federal Question [] Diversity of Citizenship A. If you checked Federal Question Which of your federal constitutional or federal statutory rights have been violated?

B. If you checked Diversity of Citizenship 1. Citizenship of the parties Of what State is each party a citizen? The plaintiff , ,is a citizen of the State of (Plaintiff’s name)

(State in which the person resides and intends to remain.) or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or subject of the foreign state of

If more than one plaintiff is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing information for each additional plaintiff.

Page 2

If the defendant is an individual:

The defendant, , is a citizen of the State of (Defendant’s name)

or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or subject of the foreign state of . If the defendant is a corporation: The defendant, , is incorporated under the laws of the State of and has its principal place of business in the State of or is incorporated under the laws of (foreign state) and has its principal place of business in . If more than one defendant is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing information for each additional defendant.

II. PARTIES A. Plaintiff Information Provide the following information for each plaintiff named in the complaint. Attach additional pages if needed.

First Name Middle Initial Last Name

Street Address

County, City State Zip Code

Telephone Number Email Address (if available) B. Defendant Information To the best of your ability, provide addresses where each defendant may be served. If the correct information is not provided, it could delay or prevent service of the complaint on the defendant. Make sure that the defendants listed below are the same as those listed in the caption. Attach additional pages if needed. Defendant 1: First Name Last Name

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

Milhouse v. Morgan and Morgan P.A., (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Milhouse v. Morgan and Morgan P.A. (Milhouse v. Morgan and Morgan P.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Tracy v. Freshwater
623 F.3d 90 (Second Circuit, 2010)