Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed an order denying the defendant's motion to dismiss a breach of contract claim and to award attorneys' fees, costs, and punitive damages under New York's anti-SLAPP statute. The court held that because the plaintiff filed an amended complaint that omitted the defamation allegations and online review references, the original complaint was superseded, leaving no basis for an anti-SLAPP remedy based on the initial pleading. Additionally, the court found the amended complaint sufficiently alleged the elements of breach of contract, and the defendant failed to demonstrate entitlement to dismissal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint for purposes of an anti‑SLAPP motion.
- Whether the amended complaint sufficiently alleges a breach‑of‑contract claim.
- Whether the motion for attorneys' fees, costs, and punitive damages based on anti‑SLAPP grounds should be denied.
Holdings
- An amended complaint, once served, supersedes the original complaint and becomes the only complaint in the case, so the court need not consider anti‑SLAPP arguments based on allegations in the original complaint.
- The amended complaint sufficiently alleged the elements of a breach‑of‑contract cause of action, so dismissal was improper.
- The court properly denied the motion for attorneys' fees, costs, and punitive damages because the anti‑SLAPP analysis was unavailable after the amended complaint superseded the original complaint.
Key quotations
“[W]hen an amended complaint has been served, it supersedes the original complaint and becomes the only complaint in the case.” (732)
“The amended complaint sufficiently alleged the elements of a breach of contract cause of action.” (728)
Factual background
Qualified Impressions, LLC filed suit alleging the defendant failed to pay for services and posted a negative online review, constituting breach of contract and defamation. The defendant moved to dismiss the complaint under the anti‑SLAPP statute and sought attorneys' fees, costs, and punitive damages. The plaintiff filed an amended complaint that omitted the defamation claim. The lower court denied the dismissal of the breach‑of‑contract claim and the fee award.
Procedural history
The plaintiff sued for breach of contract and defamation. The defendant moved to dismiss on anti‑SLAPP grounds and for fees. The plaintiff amended the complaint, removing the defamation claim. The Supreme Court, Nassau County denied the dismissal of the breach‑of‑contract claim and denied the fee award. The appellant appealed.