Perez v. Annucci
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-08069
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Perez v. Annucci, Judge Briccetti directed judgment for defendants after Perez failed to amend his complaint or seek more time.
Julio Perez and the defendants, including DOCCS Commissioner Anthony Annucci, GHCF Superintendent Griffin, GHCF Medical Supervisor Dr. Bentivegna, GHCF Medical Provider Dr. Silver, and Dr. Holder.
What happened
In Perez v. Annucci, the court had previously dismissed Julio Perez’s complaint because it did not state a legal claim. The court allowed him to file an amended complaint against Dr. Holder by January 31, 2022.
Perez did not file an amended complaint or ask for more time. The court therefore directed the Clerk to enter judgment for the defendants and close the case.
Judge Briccetti also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Perez permission to appeal without prepaying court fees.
The detailed version
- Perez v. Annucci · No. 7:20-cv-08069
- Vincent Briccetti
- Feb. 23, 2022
Background
In an earlier opinion and order dated November 29, 2021, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which applies when a complaint fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted. The court gave Julio Perez permission to file an amended complaint against only Dr. Holder, following instructions in that earlier order. The court warned Perez that failing to file an amended complaint or request additional time by January 31, 2022, would lead to judgment for the defendants and closure of the case.
Court’s Action
The court found that Perez had not filed an amended complaint or requested an extension of time. It directed the Clerk to enter judgment in the defendants’ favor and close the case.
Appeal-Fee Ruling
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Perez permission to appeal without prepaying the required court fees. The court also directed that a copy of the order be mailed to Perez.
Result
The case was closed after judgment was directed for the defendants. The order does not separately describe the claims or explain the reasoning of the November 29, 2021 dismissal beyond stating that the complaint failed to state a claim.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.