Goode v. City of New York
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:17-cv-03735
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Goode v. City of New York, Judge Engelmayer dismissed the case without prejudice because Goode failed to prosecute.
Maurice A. Goode Jr.’s case was dismissed without prejudice, and the Clerk of Court was directed to close the case and mail him a copy of the order.
What happened
In Goode v. City of New York, Magistrate Judge Lehrburger ordered Maurice A. Goode Jr. to amend his complaint by January 14, 2019, or face dismissal for failing to prosecute.
Goode did not amend his complaint or otherwise respond to that order. The court therefore dismissed the case without prejudice, meaning the opinion did not bar a new filing on that basis.
Judge Engelmayer dismissed the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and the court’s inherent authority, directed the Clerk to close the case, and ordered a copy mailed to Goode.
The detailed version
- Goode v. City of New York · No. 1:17-cv-03735
- Paul Engelmayer
- Aug. 14, 2020
Background
Maurice A. Goode Jr. sued the City of New York, Corizon Health Services, and a psychiatrist identified as “Jane Doe” of Corizon Health Services. On December 17, 2018, Magistrate Judge Lehrburger ordered Goode to amend his complaint by January 14, 2019. The order warned that the case would be dismissed if he failed to do so.
What the Court Decided
The opinion states that Goode did not amend his complaint and did not otherwise respond to the order. The court dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal itself did not bar refiling on that basis, although the opinion does not address any other requirements for a new case.
Legal Basis and Case Status
Judge Engelmayer relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits dismissal when a plaintiff fails to prosecute, and on the court’s inherent authority recognized in Link v. Wabash Railroad Co. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case and mail Goode a copy of the order. The ruling disposed of the case for failure to prosecute and did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.