Smith v. City of New York
- Rochon
- 1:23-cv-08229
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Smith v. City of New York, Judge Rochon denied Smith’s second extension request and declined to reopen the case after adopting a dismissal recommendation.
Myra S. Smith’s request for additional time to object was denied, and the closed case was not reopened. The opinion states that the earlier order dismissed her federal claims with prejudice and her remaining claims without prejudice to refiling in state court.
What happened
Myra S. Smith asked for more time to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation that her amended complaint be dismissed. The court had already granted one extension, but Smith’s second request arrived after the extended deadline.
The court said Smith had waived her right to object because she did not timely object or request another extension. It also found no good cause for another extension, noting that Smith had several weeks to file objections or seek more time.
In Smith v. City of New York, Judge Jennifer L. Rochon denied Smith’s second request for an extension and said the court would not reconsider its earlier order adopting the recommendation or reopen the case. The earlier order had dismissed Smith’s federal claims with prejudice for failure to state a claim and her remaining claims without prejudice to refiling in state court.
The detailed version
- Smith v. City of New York · No. 1:23-cv-08229
- Rochon
- Aug. 1, 2025
Background
The City of New York moved to dismiss Myra S. Smith’s amended complaint. Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger later issued a report and recommendation advising that the motion be granted and the amended complaint dismissed in its entirety. The district court extended Smith’s deadline to object to that recommendation to July 15, 2025.
On July 18, after receiving no timely objections or other correspondence from Smith, the court adopted the recommendation in full. It dismissed Smith’s federal claims with prejudice for failure to state a claim and dismissed her remaining claims without prejudice to refiling in state court. The Clerk then entered judgment and closed the case.
Current request
On July 28, the court received Smith’s second request for an extension. The request was dated July 17, after the July 15 deadline, and the opinion states that it appeared to have first been submitted to the New York City Law Department rather than the court.
The court concluded that Smith had waived her right to object to the recommendation or obtain appellate review because she had not objected or requested an extension before the deadline. The court also considered the request on the assumption that it might be timely and found no good cause for another extension. It noted that the court had already granted one extension and that Smith had several weeks before the deadline to file objections or request additional time.
Ruling
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon denied Smith’s second request for an extension to file objections. The court also stated that it would not reconsider its prior order adopting the recommendation or otherwise reopen the case. This order did not alter the earlier dismissal terms stated in the opinion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.