Flowers v. Sehl
- Analisa Torres
- 1:22-cv-02766
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Flowers v. Sehl, Judge Torres granted dismissal for failure to prosecute and dismissed Flowers’s claims with prejudice as time-barred.
Antoine Flowers’s claims were dismissed with prejudice, judgment was entered for Donald Sehl, Fred Dorch, Albert Gonzalez, Michael Best, John Doe 1-2, and the City of New York, and the case was closed.
What happened
Antoine Flowers brought this civil-rights case under federal law over a stop and search in the Bronx. He initially represented himself, and the court later appointed pro bono counsel, whose limited representation ended after discovery.
The defendants moved for summary judgment, but they could not serve the motion because Flowers had not updated his address or responded to their emails. They then asked to dismiss the case because Flowers was not prosecuting it. Judge James L. Cott recommended dismissal, and Flowers filed no objection.
Judge Analisa Torres found no clear error, adopted Judge Cott’s recommendation in full, and granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. The court dismissed Flowers’s claims with prejudice because they were time-barred, entered judgment for the defendants, and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Flowers v. Sehl · No. 1:22-cv-02766
- Analisa Torres
- Aug. 5, 2024
Background
Antoine Flowers filed a civil-rights action under Section 1983, a federal law allowing claims against certain government actors for violating federal rights. The case arose from a stop and search in the Bronx. Flowers initially represented himself. On February 7, 2023, the Court appointed pro bono counsel. Counsel represented Flowers through discovery and completed their limited appearance on February 15, 2024.
Motions and Recommendation
On May 1, 2024, the defendants moved for summary judgment. The court referred that motion to Magistrate Judge James L. Cott. The defendants were unable to serve the motion on Flowers because he had not updated his address or responded to their emails. At Judge Cott’s direction, the defendants later moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) to dismiss the action for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward.
Judge Cott issued a Report and Recommendation proposing dismissal for failure to prosecute. Flowers was notified that he could object, but he filed no objection before the deadline. Because there was no objection, Judge Torres reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Ruling
Judge Torres adopted Judge Cott’s Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute was granted. Flowers’s claims were dismissed with prejudice because they were time-barred. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 71 and 81, enter judgment for the defendants consistent with the order, and close the case. The order also directed that a copy be mailed to Flowers and sent to the email address provided by his former pro bono counsel.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.