Barrett v. Rosario
- Gregory Woods
- 1:19-cv-07815
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Barrett v. Rosario, Judge Woods rescheduled a hearing on counsel’s withdrawal and warned that continued noncompliance could lead to dismissal.
Plaintiff Chandra Barrett was ordered to attend the rescheduled hearing. Her counsel was directed to send her the order and retain proof of service. The order also affected the defendants and other participants by setting the hearing’s date, platform, and access instructions.
What happened
Barrett v. Rosario involved a hearing about Michael G. LoRusso, P.C. and Hogan & Cassell’s motions to withdraw as counsel for Chandra Barrett. The court had ordered Barrett to attend the hearing.
Barrett did not attend the April 13, 2021 hearing, although the court, the lawyers, and the court reporter appeared. The court said she had failed to comply with two court orders.
Judge Gregory H. Woods rescheduled the hearing for April 20, 2021, ordered Barrett to participate by Microsoft Teams, and warned that continued failure to follow court orders could lead to dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The order did not dismiss the case.
The detailed version
- Barrett v. Rosario · No. 1:19-cv-07815
- Gregory Woods
- Apr. 13, 2021
Background
The court had scheduled an April 13, 2021 hearing concerning Michael G. LoRusso, P.C. and Hogan & Cassell’s motions to withdraw as counsel of record for Plaintiff Chandra Barrett. In two earlier orders, the court directed Barrett to attend. She did not attend the April 13 hearing, although the court, Plaintiff’s counsel, Defendants’ counsel, and the court reporter appeared by telephone or videoconference.
Order
The court rescheduled the hearing for April 20, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., and ordered Barrett to participate. The proceeding was to take place on Microsoft Teams. The order directed participants to test their equipment in advance and provided instructions for accessing the proceeding, including telephone access for members of the press, public, and counsel. Plaintiff’s counsel was directed to email and mail Barrett a copy of the order and keep proof that it was served.
Warning About Possible Dismissal
The court stated that Barrett had failed to comply with two court orders. It noted that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits dismissal when a plaintiff fails to prosecute a case or comply with court rules or a court order, and that a district court may dismiss a case on its own initiative for failure to prosecute. The court said it expected to dismiss the case if Barrett continued to fail to comply. This order itself did not dismiss the case or decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.