Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:20-cv-03843
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Judge Engelmayer granted Mark Garnes’s application for permission to proceed without paying required court costs.
Mark Garnes, the self-represented plaintiff seeking permission to proceed without paying required court costs.
What happened
In Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc., Mark Garnes, representing himself, submitted an amended application asking to proceed without paying required court costs. A magistrate judge recommended granting the application.
No party objected to the recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it only for clear error and found none, adopting the recommendation in full.
Judge Paul Engelmayer granted Garnes’s application. The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived appellate review and directed the clerk to mail Garnes a copy of the decision.
The detailed version
- Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-03843
- Paul Engelmayer
- Aug. 4, 2022
Background
Mark Garnes, who was representing himself, filed an amended application to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning to proceed without paying required court costs. The application was his “Third Application.” Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave recommended that the court grant it.
Court’s Review
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), a district court may accept, reject, or change a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. When no timely objection is filed, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record.
No party objected to the report and recommendation. The court reviewed it and found no facial error, so it adopted the report in its entirety. The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived appellate review because the report had warned that an objection had to be filed within 14 days.
Disposition
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted Garnes’s Third Application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court directed the clerk to mail Garnes a copy of the decision. This order addressed the fee application and did not decide the underlying claims described in the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.