Simmons v. Marasa
- Philip Halpern
- 7:17-cv-08886
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Simmons v. Mason, Judge Halpern adopted the recommendation and granted defendants’ motions to dismiss for failure to prosecute.
The dismissal ended Antoine T. Simmons’s civil-rights action against the defendants named in the opinion, including the identified Yonkers City police officers and Dr. Frank Weber.
What happened
In Simmons v. Mason, Antoine T. Simmons, representing himself, brought a civil-rights lawsuit under a federal law allowing claims against state officials. The defendants were Yonkers City police officers and Dr. Frank Weber.
The defendants filed motions to dismiss after Simmons failed to participate as directed. He did not file opposition papers, did not attend a scheduled telephone conference, and did not object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation that the case be dismissed.
Judge Philip M. Halpern found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss for failure to prosecute, and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment and close the case.
The detailed version
- Simmons v. Marasa · No. 7:17-cv-08886
- Philip Halpern
- May 31, 2022
Background
Antoine T. Simmons proceeded without a lawyer and brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Yonkers City Police Officers Api, Lebzetter, McManus, and Spaun, and Dr. Frank Weber. The opinion states that the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Krause for pretrial matters and motions that could dispose of the case.
On March 16, 2022, Magistrate Judge Krause allowed the defendants to seek dismissal based on Simmons’s failure to participate in the action. The magistrate judge set deadlines requiring the defendants to file their motion papers by March 30, 2022, Simmons to file opposition papers by April 18, 2022, and the parties to attend a telephone conference on April 27, 2022.
The defendants filed their motion papers on March 30. Simmons did not file opposition papers and did not appear at the April 27 conference. Magistrate Judge Krause issued a Report and Recommendation on May 4, 2022, recommending that the motions to dismiss be granted and that the action be dismissed with prejudice.
Review of the Recommendation
The court explained that the parties had seventeen days after the recommendation was mailed to file objections. Because the recommendation was mailed to Simmons on May 4, 2022, objections were due by May 23, 2022. No objections were filed.
When no timely objection is made, a district court may adopt the recommendation if it finds no clear error on the face of the record. After reviewing the record, the court found no clear error in Magistrate Judge Krause’s analysis and adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety.
Ruling
Judge Philip M. Halpern granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss for failure to prosecute and dismissed the matter with prejudice. The clerk was directed to mail Simmons a copy of the order, enter judgment, and close the case.
Meaning of the Disposition
Failure to prosecute means failing to move a lawsuit forward or participate as required. The opinion’s ruling was based on Simmons’s failure to participate, rather than a decision resolving the underlying civil-rights claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.