Julian v. MetLife, Inc.
- Andrew Carter
- 1:17-cv-00957
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Julian v. MetLife, Judge Nathan adopted the recommendation and granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff Arroyo’s claims without prejudice.
Plaintiff Arroyo’s claims were dismissed without prejudice; the order also affected the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
What happened
In Julian v. MetLife, Inc., the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning Plaintiff Arroyo’s claims against the defendants.
No objections were filed by the deadline, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error—whether the record showed an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error.
Judge Alison J. Nathan adopted the recommendation in full and granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff Arroyo’s claims without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Julian v. MetLife, Inc. · No. 1:17-cv-00957
- Andrew Carter
- Oct. 19, 2020
Background
The court considered Judge Moses’s Report and Recommendation, which recommended granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff Arroyo’s claims without prejudice. The opinion does not state the underlying reasons for that recommendation.
Review standard
Because no objections were filed before the deadline, Judge Nathan reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error. That standard asks whether the record leaves the court with a firm conviction that a mistake was made.
Ruling
The court found no clear error, adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety, and granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff Arroyo’s claims without prejudice. The order does not provide additional details about the dismissed claims or the grounds for dismissal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.