Legal Opinion
Brodsky v. HiLine Coffee Company, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided October 26, 2019No. 1:19-cv-04308Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONIC ALLY FILED □ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK : □□ DOC #: JAY BRODSKY, DATE FILED: [0/26 [1% Plaintiff, 19-ev—-4308 (JGK) - against — MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER HILINE COFFEE COMPANY, INC., ET AL., Defendants. JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge: The Court has received the plaintiff’s attached memo explaining why he was unable to effect service of the summons and complaint. Therefore, the time to serve the summons and complaint is extended by 60 days. The motion for default judgment is denied because the plaintiff has yet to serve the defendant. However, under…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Vandiver v. MartinDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2004
- Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Thomas Robins v. Spokeo, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Noreen Susinno v. Work Out World IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.