Gentile v. Annucci
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:21-cv-03405
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Gentile v. Annucci, Judge Briccetti ordered voluntary dismissal without prejudice, closed the case, and denied fee-waiver status for an appeal.
Joseph J. Gentile, the named defendants, and any pending proceedings in the case were affected by the dismissal. The order also denied Gentile permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
What happened
In Gentile v. Annucci, Joseph J. Gentile, who was incarcerated and representing himself, told the court that he wanted to withdraw the case. The defendants were Acting Commissioner Anthony J. Annucci, Superintendent Edward Burnett, Deputy of Programs John Wood, Assistant Deputy of Programs Luis Gonzales, and L.M.S.W. Fuez.
The court treated Gentile’s letter as a notice voluntarily dismissing the case without prejudice. It ordered the dismissal, canceled all deadlines, conferences, and other scheduled appearances, and found that any pending motions were no longer relevant.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti ordered the case closed. He also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Gentile permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Gentile v. Annucci · No. 7:21-cv-03405
- Vincent Briccetti
- Feb. 7, 2022
Background
Joseph J. Gentile, who was incarcerated, represented himself and was proceeding without paying filing fees. The opinion states that on February 7, 2022, the court received Gentile’s letter stating: “I move to withdraw the above mentioned action.” The defendants were Acting Commissioner Anthony J. Annucci, Superintendent Edward Burnett, Deputy of Programs John Wood, Assistant Deputy of Programs Luis Gonzales, and L.M.S.W. Fuez.
Ruling
The court construed Gentile’s letter as a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). The court ordered that the case be dismissed, canceled all deadlines, scheduled conferences, and other scheduled court appearances, and ruled that any pending motions were moot. The clerk was instructed to close the case.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the case ended through voluntary dismissal and the court did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.