Barnes v. Correct Care Solutions
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:18-cv-12288
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Barnes v. Correct Care Solutions, Judge Briccetti deemed the unopposed dismissal motion submitted and denied Ronald Barnes permission to appeal without paying fees.
Ronald Barnes and the defendants who moved to dismiss, Correct Care Solutions and Dr. Sorrel Feldman. The order also affects Barnes’s ability to appeal without prepaying court fees.
What happened
Barnes v. Correct Care Solutions is a civil-rights case brought by Ronald Barnes, who represented himself, against Correct Care Solutions, Dr. Sorrel Feldman, and other Orange County Jail medical staff.
Correct Care Solutions and Dr. Feldman asked the court to dismiss the complaint. The court had extended Barnes’s deadline to respond and warned that the motion would be treated as submitted without opposition if he did not respond. Barnes did not file a response or ask for more time.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti treated the dismissal motion as fully submitted and unopposed. The order did not decide the dismissal motion itself. The court also denied Barnes permission to appeal without paying fees, stating that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Barnes v. Correct Care Solutions · No. 7:18-cv-12288
- Vincent Briccetti
- Jan. 14, 2020
Background
Ronald Barnes, proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying court fees, brought this civil-rights action against Correct Care Solutions, Dr. Sorrel Feldman—identified as having been incorrectly sued as Dr. Philman—and other staff of the Orange County Jail Medical Department.
Correct Care Solutions and Dr. Feldman filed a motion to dismiss on November 6, 2019. They served Barnes by regular mail with the motion and supporting papers. Barnes later asked for appointed volunteer counsel in two federal civil cases, including this one. On December 2, 2019, the court denied that request without prejudice and extended Barnes’s deadline to oppose the dismissal motion to December 30, 2019. The court warned that the motion would be treated as fully submitted and unopposed if Barnes did not respond. A December 5 order repeated that warning.
Court’s Action
Barnes did not file an opposition or request another extension. The court therefore deemed the dismissal motion fully submitted and unopposed. The order did not rule on whether the complaint should be dismissed.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It denied Barnes permission to appeal without prepaying court fees. The Clerk was directed to mail Barnes a copy of the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.