Hickman v. The City of New York

Background

Quandell Hickman, representing himself and proceeding without paying filing fees, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for money damages and injunctive relief. He alleged that corrections officers at the Anna M. Kross Center on Rikers Island sprayed him with a chemical agent in a bus and in housing areas between March and May 2020. He also alleged that he was denied medical attention and that the chemical agent caused loss of consciousness, breathing problems, vomiting, and headaches.

The defendants—the City of New York, Captain Christian, and C.O. Bordeaus—moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(b) and 37. They argued that Hickman had failed to prosecute the case and had not participated in discovery.

Failure to Participate

Hickman did not attend four telephone conferences scheduled between December 8, 2020, and January 28, 2021. He attended the February 9, 2021 conference but later failed to attend conferences scheduled for July 7 and July 20, 2021. The defendants also stated that they had served initial disclosures, document requests, and interrogatories in March and April 2021 and received no response.

The court’s orders warned Hickman that failing to comply with court orders could lead to sanctions, including dismissal. The defendants separately notified him of the July conferences and warned that they would seek dismissal if he did not provide discovery. Hickman communicated with the defendants by email in June 2021, explaining that his grandmother had died and that he had not received mail, but he did not update the court with the new address he mentioned. He also did not respond to the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Kevin Fox recommended dismissal for failure to prosecute. He considered the five factors used for a dismissal under Rule 41(b): the length of the failure to participate, whether the plaintiff was warned about dismissal, likely prejudice to the defendants, the court’s need to manage its docket compared with the plaintiff’s opportunity to be heard, and whether a lesser sanction could work. Judge Fox concluded that the delay was substantial, Hickman had received warnings, the defendants would be prejudiced by further delay, and a lesser sanction would be ineffective.

Hickman later sent letters reporting his grandmother’s death, homelessness, detention at Rikers Island, and problems receiving mail. He also asked the court to deny the motion, citing the COVID-19 pandemic and his lack of legal knowledge. Although his January 20, 2022 letter was late and did not specifically address Judge Fox’s findings, the court treated it as an objection and reviewed the recommendation for clear error.

Ruling

Judge Gardephe concluded that Hickman had not adequately explained his failure to prosecute the case from February through December 2021. The court emphasized his repeated failure to attend conferences, respond to discovery, keep the court informed of his address, and respond to the dismissal motion. It found that no sanction short of dismissal would be effective.

The court adopted Judge Fox’s Report and Recommendation in its entirety. It dismissed Hickman’s claims without prejudice under Rule 41(b) and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.