Edwards v. Annucci
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:17-cv-05018
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In Edwards v. Annucci, Judge Briccetti deferred a medical-records motion and extended Edwards’s address deadline, warning dismissal if he failed to comply.
William L. Edwards and the remaining defendants, because the court deferred the defendants’ request for a medical-records authorization and imposed an address-update and conference-appearance deadline on Edwards.
What happened
In Edwards v. Annucci, defense counsel asked the court to require William L. Edwards, who had no lawyer, to complete a form allowing access to his medical records. The records concerned treatment and psychological conditions Edwards connected to his excessive-force claims.
The court did not decide the request immediately. It said it would address the request at a February 6, 2020, case-management conference if Edwards appeared. The court also extended Edwards’s deadline to provide his current address to February 4, 2020.
The court warned that failing to update his address and appear at the conference could lead to dismissal for failing to pursue the case or follow court orders. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Edwards v. Annucci · No. 7:17-cv-05018
- Vincent Briccetti
- Jan. 21, 2020
Background
Defense counsel asked the court to compel William L. Edwards, who was proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying filing fees, to complete and return a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) authorization form. Counsel said Edwards had received the form on October 17, 2019, but had not returned it.
According to the motion, Edwards had testified at his deposition about psychological conditions and medications that he attributed to an alleged excessive-force incident. Defense counsel said medical records from Edwards’s treatment while in the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision were needed to evaluate Edwards’s claims for emotional distress and psychological illness.
Court’s Action
The court deferred ruling on the request to compel the authorization. It stated that, if Edwards appeared at the case-management conference scheduled for February 6, 2020, at 9:30 a.m., it would address the request then.
The court also stated that an earlier order mailed to Edwards had been returned as undeliverable. That earlier order required Edwards to provide his current address in writing and warned that failing to do so could result in dismissal. Because Edwards was proceeding without a lawyer, the court extended his deadline to provide his current address to February 4, 2020.
The court ordered that copies of the earlier order and this order be mailed to the address Edwards had provided at the December 6, 2019, case-management conference. It warned that if Edwards failed to update his address by February 4 and failed to appear at the February 6 conference, the court would dismiss the case for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The court did not dismiss the case in this order.
Disposition
The court deferred ruling on the motion to compel; it did not grant or deny that motion. It extended Edwards’s deadline to provide his address and warned of possible dismissal if he did not comply with the stated requirements. The court also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Edwards fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
The supplied case name is Edwards v. Annucci, but the endorsement identifies the matter as Edwards v. Daniels, et al., and the attached defense letter identifies it as Edwards v. Argibay et al. The opinion text therefore contains inconsistent case captions.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.