From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robinson v. Wolf-Friedman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 8, 2021
18 CIVIL 2409 (PMH) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 8, 2021)

Opinion

18 CIVIL 2409 (PMH)

02-08-2021

JAMES ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. JANICE LYNN WOLF-FRIEDMAN, et al., Defendants.


JUDGMENT

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated February 5, 2021, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motion to dismiss. While "[d]istrict courts should frequently provide leave to amend before dismissing a pro se complaint . . . leave to amend is not necessary when it would be futile." Reed v. Friedman Mgt. Corp., 541 F. App'x 40, 41 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000)). Here, the Court dismisses Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice as any amendment would be futile and Plaintiff has already had an opportunity to amend his pleading; accordingly, this case is closed. Dated: New York, New York

February 8, 2021

RUBY J. KRAJICK

Clerk of Court

BY: /s/ _________

Deputy Clerk


Summaries of

Robinson v. Wolf-Friedman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 8, 2021
18 CIVIL 2409 (PMH) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 8, 2021)
Case details for

Robinson v. Wolf-Friedman

Case Details

Full title:JAMES ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. JANICE LYNN WOLF-FRIEDMAN, et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Feb 8, 2021

Citations

18 CIVIL 2409 (PMH) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 8, 2021)