Cenedella v. Metropolitan Museum of Art et al
Robert Cenedella |
Metropolitan Museum of Art, Whitney Museum of American Art, Museum of Modern Art, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum and New Museum Of Contemporary Art |
1:2018cv01029 |
February 6, 2018 |
US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
Foley Square Office |
New York |
John G. Koeltl |
Antitrust |
15 U.S.C. ยง 26 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 40 OPINION AND ORDER re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. filed by Whitney Museum of American Art, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New Museum Of Contemporary Art, Museum of Mode rn Art. The Court has considered all of the arguments raised by the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed, the arguments are either moot or without merit. For the reasons explained above, the defendant's motion to dismiss the plaint iff's amended complaint is granted, and the plaintiff's amended complaint is dismissed without prejudice. The plaintiff must file a motion to amend, including a copy of the proposed second amended complaint, by January 15, 2019, and the def endants may respond by February 5, 2019. The plaintiff may reply by February 15, 2019. The Clerk of Court is ordered to close Docket Number 31. SO ORDERED., (Motions due by 1/15/2019., Responses due by 2/5/2019, Replies due by 2/15/2019.) (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 12/19/18) (yv) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.