Poletti v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company Of New York, Inc.
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:21-cv-07603
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Poletti v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company Of New York, Inc., Judge Broderick adopted a dismissal recommendation and directed dismissal of Natalie Blue Murn’s claims.
Natalie Blue Murn, in her capacity as Administrator CTA of the Estate of George Murn, and the estate’s claims in this action.
What happened
In Poletti v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company Of New York, Inc., Natalie Blue Murn, acting as administrator of George Murn’s estate, asked to replace him as a party after his death and filed a notice voluntarily dismissing the estate’s claims. No party objected to the recommendation to dismiss those claims without prejudice.
The magistrate judge found that no court review of a settlement was needed because there was no settlement agreement and none was planned. After the objection period expired, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick adopted the recommendation in full and directed the Clerk of Court to dismiss Natalie Blue Murn and her claims from the action. The ruling addressed only the estate’s claims and did not decide the merits of the remaining claims described in the opinion.
The detailed version
- Poletti v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company Of New York, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-07603
- Vernon Broderick
- Jan. 7, 2025
Background
George Murn died on January 29, 2024. Natalie Blue Murn, acting as Administrator CTA of his estate, moved to substitute herself as a party and filed a notice of voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). The magistrate judge granted the unopposed substitution request.
The case involves claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing wages and working conditions. The magistrate judge recommended dismissing Natalie Blue Murn’s claims without prejudice. The recommendation explained that court review of a settlement was not required because there was no settlement agreement and none was contemplated. The recommendation gave the parties 14 days to file written objections, but no party objected or requested more time.
Court’s Analysis
A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. When no timely objection is filed, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. Judge Broderick reviewed the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation under that standard and found no clear error.
Disposition
Judge Broderick adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety. The Clerk of Court was directed to dismiss Natalie Blue Murn and her claims from the action. The opinion does not state any ruling on the merits of the remaining claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.