Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Feb. 20, 2025

Anderson Bey v. Roc Nation LLC

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:24-cv-02295
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Summary JudgmentCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Anderson Bey v. Roc Nation, Judge Carter denied without prejudice the plaintiff’s motions for sanctions and partial summary judgment.

Who this affects

Plaintiff Bernard T. Anderson Bey and the defendants in this action; the court denied the plaintiff’s two motions without prejudice.

What happened

In Bernard T. Anderson Bey v. Roc Nation LLC, et al., the plaintiff asked the court to impose sanctions and to grant him partial summary judgment. He was representing himself without a lawyer.

The court said the plaintiff filed both motions without first submitting the required letter requesting a pre-motion conference. That violated the court’s Individual Rules of Practice.

The court denied both motions without prejudice and directed the clerk to terminate the related docket entries. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. issued the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Anderson Bey v. Roc Nation LLC · No. 1:24-cv-02295
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Feb. 20, 2025

Background

Bernard T. Anderson Bey filed this action and was proceeding without a lawyer. He filed a motion for partial summary judgment and a motion for sanctions. The opinion states that the court had previously addressed these motions and the plaintiff’s failure to seek a pre-motion conference during a December 3, 2024 status conference.

Reasoning

The court explained that self-represented litigants receive special consideration when their filings are reviewed, but they generally must still follow understandable procedural rules. The court found that Anderson Bey filed both motions without first filing the pre-motion conference letter required by the court’s Individual Rules of Practice.

Ruling

The court denied the plaintiff’s motion for sanctions and motion for partial summary judgment without prejudice. It directed the clerk to terminate ECF Nos. 56 and 69. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims or the merits of the requested summary judgment.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.