Hassan v. Reynoso
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:19-cv-05938
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Hassan v. Reynoso, Judge Gardephe dismissed Hassan’s claims without prejudice for failure to prosecute after he stopped updating his address.
Hassan’s claims were dismissed without prejudice, and the case was closed. The defendants were no longer required to litigate the action in that case.
What happened
Hassan, representing himself, brought a civil-rights lawsuit against Correction Officer Reynoso and others. After Hassan was released from custody, the court repeatedly ordered him to update his address, but he did not do so or otherwise participate after January 17, 2020.
Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn recommended dismissing the case because Hassan failed to follow the court’s orders and failed to prosecute it. Neither side objected to that recommendation.
Judge Gardephe reviewed the recommendation for clear error, found none, and adopted it in its entirety. The court dismissed Hassan’s claims without prejudice for failure to prosecute and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
The detailed version
- Hassan v. Reynoso · No. 1:19-cv-05938
- Paul Gardephe
- Sept. 8, 2020
Background
Eslam Hassan filed a civil-rights action under Section 1983 while proceeding without a lawyer. The court had granted his application to proceed without paying filing fees and referred the case to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn for general pretrial supervision. Hassan later filed an amended complaint.
Hassan submitted several address-change forms, most recently informing the court on January 17, 2020, that he had been transferred to Sing Sing Correctional Facility. After defendants informed Judge Netburn that Hassan had been released from the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, she stayed the case and ordered Hassan to update his address within 30 days. She issued similar orders on two later dates and warned that the case could be dismissed if he did not comply.
When Hassan did not update his address or otherwise appear, Judge Netburn ordered him to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Hassan did not comply. Judge Netburn then issued a Report and Recommendation recommending dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Review of the Recommendation
The Report and Recommendation explained that the parties had 14 days to object and warned that failing to object would waive further judicial review. Neither party objected. Judge Gardephe stated that judicial review had therefore been waived, but he nevertheless reviewed the recommendation for clear error.
Judge Netburn applied the five-factor test used to decide whether dismissal for failure to prosecute is appropriate. She found that all factors favored dismissal, including Hassan’s failure to follow court orders or participate in the case since January 17, 2020, the prejudice to defendants, and the burden on the court. She concluded that dismissal without prejudice was the appropriate lesser sanction.
Ruling
Judge Gardephe found the Report and Recommendation well-reasoned and free of clear error. He adopted it in its entirety and dismissed Hassan’s claims without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case. The opinion did not decide the underlying merits of Hassan’s civil-rights claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.