Winters v. City of New York

Background

The court received notice that several orders mailed to Jason Winters’s address of record had been returned. The defendants reported that they had been unable to reach Winters for more than a month. They stated that Winters had contacted them after his release from New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision custody, provided an updated mailing address during a later call, and then stopped communicating.

The court noted that Winters had not updated his address with the court since his release. It also noted that he had not served initial disclosures on the defendants or responded to their discovery requests.

Order to Show Cause

On December 1, 2021, the court ordered Winters to explain in writing why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The order warned that failing to update his address could independently support dismissal and that failure to comply could result in dismissal. Winters did not respond, show cause, or otherwise indicate that he intended to comply. By the date of the decision, he had failed to update his address for approximately five months and had not communicated with the defendants for approximately four months.

Court’s Analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) allows a court to dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute the case or comply with the rules or a court order. The court considered the relevant factors, including the length of the noncompliance, whether the plaintiff was warned about dismissal, likely prejudice to the defendants from further delay, the court’s interest in managing its docket, the plaintiff’s opportunity to be heard, and whether a less severe sanction had been considered.

The court concluded that these circumstances strongly favored dismissal. It stated that Winters had received express notice that noncompliance could result in dismissal and that the extended lack of contact and failure to update his address left the court with the distinct impression that he had lost interest in pursuing the case.

Disposition

Judge Katherine Polk Failla dismissed the case under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order. The clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions, adjourn remaining dates, and close the case. The order does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.