Velazquez v. State of New York
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:18-cv-08800
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jose I. Velazquez v. Kathleen G. Gerbing, Judge Karas ordered Velazquez to explain why his case should not be dismissed for failing to prosecute.
Jose I. Velazquez, whose case was subject to possible dismissal if he did not explain his failure to prosecute; the order also concerned the defendants because the case remained pending.
What happened
In Jose I. Velazquez v. Kathleen G. Gerbing, the court addressed Velazquez’s failure to keep the court informed of his current address and respond to an order. The court had previously dismissed his claims without prejudice and allowed him 30 days to file a second amended complaint.
Mailing to Velazquez’s last known address was returned as undeliverable. He did not respond to the court’s April 22, 2021 order requiring him to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failing to prosecute, or otherwise contact the court.
Judge Karas ordered Velazquez to show cause by June 28, 2021, why the case should not be dismissed. The court stated that it may dismiss the case without further notice if Velazquez does not show good cause, but this order did not itself dismiss the case.
The detailed version
- Velazquez v. State of New York · No. 7:18-cv-08800
- Kenneth Karas
- May 27, 2021
Background
Velazquez previously informed the court that he lived at a men’s shelter and later moved to a hotel while remaining under the shelter’s supervision. The court updated the docket with his hotel address. Velazquez used that address in later filings, and defendants served their dismissal-motion papers there. Velazquez responded to those papers.
On March 9, 2021, the court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss. It dismissed Velazquez’s claims without prejudice and gave him 30 days to file a second amended complaint addressing problems identified in the court’s earlier opinion and order. The Clerk mailed that opinion and order to Velazquez, and the court received no notice that the mailing had been returned.
On April 22, 2021, the court issued an order requiring Velazquez to explain by May 24, 2021, why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. The mailing was returned as undeliverable. Velazquez did not respond to the order or otherwise communicate with the court. The opinion states that he had been advised to promptly notify the court if his address changed and that failing to do so could result in dismissal.
Court’s Action
Judge Kenneth M. Karas ordered Velazquez to show cause by June 28, 2021, why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The court directed the Clerk to mail the order to Velazquez and stated that it may dismiss the case without further notice if he did not show good cause. The order to show cause was not itself a dismissal of the case.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court addressed case administration and possible dismissal for failure to prosecute rather than deciding the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.