Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Dec. 1, 2025

Mercado v. Haidome

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:24-cv-02784
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
First AmendmentSummary JudgmentCivil RightsPro Se
In one sentence

In Christian Mercado v. Utomi Haidome, Judge Torres adopted the recommendation, granted summary judgment to Haidome, and dismissed Mercado’s claim with prejudice.

Who this affects

Christian Mercado a/k/a Debra Mercado’s claim against Utomi Haidome was dismissed with prejudice, and the case was closed; Haidome’s summary-judgment motion was granted.

What happened

Christian Mercado, also known as Debra Mercado, sued Utomi Haidome over an alleged violation of her First Amendment right to practice her Wiccan religion while she was detained before trial at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center at Rikers Island in 2023.

Haidome moved for summary judgment, arguing that Mercado had not completed the required administrative process and that her claim failed under the law. Judge Torres referred the motion to Judge Sarah L. Cave, who recommended granting the motion and dismissing Mercado’s claim with prejudice. Mercado did not object to the recommendation.

Judge Analisa Torres found no clear error, adopted Judge Cave’s recommendation in full, granted Haidome’s motion for summary judgment, and dismissed Mercado’s claim with prejudice. The court directed the clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mercado v. Haidome · No. 1:24-cv-02784
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Dec. 1, 2025

Background

Christian Mercado a/k/a Debra Mercado, representing herself, sued Utomi Haidome. Mercado alleged that Haidome violated her First Amendment right to freely practice her Wiccan religion while Mercado was detained before trial at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center at Rikers Island in 2023.

Motion and Recommendation

Haidome moved for summary judgment, a procedure for deciding a claim when the moving party contends that the undisputed record requires judgment in its favor. Haidome argued that Mercado had failed to complete the required administrative process and that her claim failed as a matter of law. Judge Torres referred the motion to Judge Sarah L. Cave for a report and recommendation.

Judge Cave recommended granting Haidome’s motion and dismissing Mercado’s claim with prejudice, meaning the claim could not be brought again. The parties had notice of the right to object, but no objections were filed before the deadline.

Ruling

Because no objections were filed, Judge Torres reviewed the recommendation for clear error. She found no clear error in Judge Cave’s analysis and adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety. Judge Torres granted Haidome’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Mercado’s claim with prejudice. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion, mail the order to Mercado, and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.