Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 29, 2020

Starkes v. Annucci

Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Docket
7:19-cv-07270
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Starkes v. Annucci, Judge Briccetti ordered the pro se plaintiff to update his address or face dismissal for failing to prosecute.

Who this affects

Quentin Starkes was required to update his address by August 27, 2020. The defendants were affected because the case remained subject to possible dismissal if Starkes did not comply; the opinion does not state that the case was dismissed in this order.

What happened

In Starkes v. Annucci, Quentin Starkes was representing himself and had been incarcerated at Westchester County Jail and later at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. He told the court about his address change but did not later report another change after mail to the Brooklyn address was returned.

The defendants had moved to dismiss the amended complaint, and Starkes did not oppose that motion or request more time. The court also sent orders to a suspected address at the United States Penitentiary in Canaan, Pennsylvania, but Starkes still did not update his address.

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti ordered Starkes to provide his current address by August 27, 2020. The order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal for failure to prosecute or follow court orders, and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Starkes v. Annucci · No. 7:19-cv-07270
Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Date
July 29, 2020

Background

Quentin Starkes filed the action while incarcerated at Westchester County Jail and was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. He later notified the court that his address had changed to the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. The court had previously warned him that he was responsible for reporting address changes in writing and that the case could be dismissed if he failed to do so.

The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint on March 31, 2020. Starkes did not timely oppose the motion, so the court extended his deadline to May 20, 2020. He still did not file an opposition or request another extension. On June 4, 2020, the court treated the motion as fully submitted and unopposed.

Address and Compliance History

Mail containing the court's April 29 order was returned as undeliverable because Starkes was no longer at the Brooklyn facility. Information from the Federal Bureau of Prisons website suggested that he had been moved to the United States Penitentiary in Canaan, Pennsylvania.

On June 9, 2020, the court ordered Starkes to provide his current address in writing by July 9, 2020. The court warned, in bold and underlined text, that failure to do so could lead to dismissal for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders. The court mailed that order, along with earlier orders, to both the Brooklyn address and the suspected Canaan address. The Brooklyn mail was returned, but the mailing to the Canaan address had not been returned as undeliverable.

Starkes did not update his address or request more time by July 9, 2020.

Ruling

The court gave Starkes another deadline: he had to update his current address in writing by August 27, 2020. The court stated that failure to comply with the order would result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). This order itself set a deadline and warning; it did not state that the action was dismissed.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying the appeal fees. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.