Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 18, 2022

Vazquez v. City of New York

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:21-cv-01573
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Vazquez v. City of New York, Judge Engelmayer will consider Vazquez’s late objections and set an August 1 response deadline.

Who this affects

Juan M. Vazquez, Dana Roth, and the City of New York.

What happened

In Vazquez v. City of New York, Juan M. Vazquez objected to a magistrate judge’s report. The report was mailed to him on June 21, 2022, making his objections due July 8, but the court received them on July 12.

Vazquez said he did not receive the report until June 28. Because he is representing himself and is incarcerated, the court said it intends to consider his late objections.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer gave Dana Roth and the City of New York until August 1, 2022, to respond if they choose. The clerk was also directed to mail Vazquez a copy of the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Vazquez v. City of New York · No. 1:21-cv-01573
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
July 18, 2022

Background

Juan M. Vazquez, who is representing himself and is incarcerated at Attica Correctional Facility, submitted objections to Judge Figueredo’s Report and Recommendations. The report was mailed to Vazquez on June 21, 2022. Accounting for three additional days for service by mail, the court calculated that his objections were due July 8, 2022.

The court received Vazquez’s objections on July 12, 2022, after an order issued on July 11. Vazquez stated that he did not receive the report until June 28, 2022.

Ruling

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer stated that the court intended to consider Vazquez’s objections despite their late receipt. The court ordered that any responses from defendants Dana Roth and the City of New York were due August 1, 2022. The clerk was directed to mail Vazquez a copy of the order at the address on file.

This order addresses the timing and handling of Vazquez’s objections. It does not state a ruling on the objections or on the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.