Case Details

CourtSouthern District of New York
Docket number1:13-cv-00416-RPP
Date case filed
Date case closed
Date of latest filing
Assigned to
Case cause28:1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander
Nature of suitAssault Libel & Slander
Jury demand

Case Parties

None listed

Case Docket

Date FiledDocument
Long Description
52013-07-31 OPINION AND ORDER. Defendant's motion to dismiss the Complaint and cross-motion to dismiss are denied. Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on December 20, 2012, and Defendant's assertions that Plaintiffs' reasons for seeking an extension of time on December 7, 2012 were unreasonable are rejected since one plaintiff resides in Mexico and Defendant was demanding a verified complaint. Defendant's cross-motion seeking sanctions against Plaintiffs and their counsel is governed by Rul e 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure due to Defendant's removal of this case. See InterChem Asia 2000 Pte. Ltd. v. Oceana Petrochemicals AG, 373 F. Supp. 2d 340, 357, n.15 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). None of Defendant's representations to the Court concerning the actions of Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs' counsel are sufficiently harmful to Defendant to warrant the imposition of sanctions under Rule 11. Accordingly, Defendant is ordered to move or answer the Complaint within ten days of the date of this opinion. A Rule 26 compliance and scheduling conference will be held on August 29, 2013 at 3:00 p.m. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 7/29/2013) Copies Faxed By Chambers. (rjm)