Opinion

DeRaffele v. Williams and Williams

Court
District Court, S.D. New York
Filed
Feb 16, 2023
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 27.6%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

wee eK

JOHN DERAFFELE,

Plaintiff,

-against- 21 CIVIL 06033 (PMH)

JUDGMENT

WILLIAMS AND WILLIAMS, AUCTION

NETWORK, JENNIFER BENNETT, JOHN

HEILIGER, and WILLIAMS AND WILLIAMS

MARKETING SERVICES, INC.,

Defendant.

wenn K

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons

stated in the Court's Opinion & Order dated February 16, 2023, Defendants’ motion to dismiss

pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) is GRANTED. 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 Met. Corp., 541 F. App'x 40, 41 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Cuoco v.

Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000)). Here, Plaintiff has already amended his complaint

once and any further amendment would be futile. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is

dismissed with prejudice; accordingly, the case is closed.

Dated: New York, New York

February 16, 2023

RUBY J. KRAJICK

Clerk of Court

BY:

Deputy Clerk

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.