Adams v. NYC Department of Corrections
- John Cronan
- 1:19-cv-05009
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Adams v. NYC Department of Corrections, Judge Cronan dismissed the case without prejudice after Adams failed to update his address.
Corwin Adams's action against the City of New York and Correction Officer Cooper was dismissed without prejudice; pending motions were declared moot, conferences were canceled, and the case was closed.
What happened
In Adams v. NYC Department of Corrections, Corwin Adams was representing himself. The court had ordered him to update his address by March 5, 2021, and warned that failing to do so could lead to dismissal. A copy of that order was also sent to the Brooklyn 3 Parole Office.
Adams did not update his address. The court dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). This means the dismissal did not permanently bar the action from being brought again.
Judge John P. Cronan also ruled that any pending motions were moot, canceled all conferences, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
The detailed version
- Adams v. NYC Department of Corrections · No. 1:19-cv-05009
- John Cronan
- Mar. 24, 2021
Background
Corwin Adams, the plaintiff, was proceeding without a lawyer against the City of New York and Correction Officer Cooper. On February 8, 2021, the court ordered Adams to update his address of record by March 5, 2021. The court warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal for failure to prosecute. Because public records indicated that Adams was under the supervision of the Brooklyn 3 Parole Office, the court also sent that order to the office.
Ruling
Adams did not update his address. The court therefore dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The opinion did not decide the underlying claims against the defendants. The court also ruled that any pending motions were moot, canceled all conferences, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Effect
The case was closed based on Adams's failure to maintain a current address with the court. Because the dismissal was without prejudice, the order did not permanently bar the action from being brought again.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.