Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 26, 2022

Rose v. The State of New York

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:21-cv-03164
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Motion to DismissCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Rose v. City of New York Department of Correction, Judge Torres adopted the recommendation, granted defendants’ motion to dismiss, and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Darrell Rose and the defendants named in the order: The City of New York Department of Correction, Deputy Guity, Captain Chacara, Correctional Officer #17482, and R. Ksetka.

What happened

In Rose v. The City of New York Department of Correction, Darrell Rose was the plaintiff, and the defendants were the department and five individuals identified in the order.

The court received no objections to a recommended decision from Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang. After reviewing that recommendation for clear error, the court found none and adopted it in full. The opinion does not state the recommendation’s underlying reasoning.

Judge Analisa Torres granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the case with prejudice. The clerk was directed to close the case and mail the order to Rose, who was representing himself.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rose v. The State of New York · No. 1:21-cv-03164
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Sept. 26, 2022

Background

Darrell Rose sued The City of New York Department of Correction, Deputy Guity, Captain Chacara, Correctional Officer #17482, and R. Ksetka. The opinion does not describe the factual allegations or legal claims.

Recommendation and Review

The court had received a report and recommendation from Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang. No party objected. Judge Torres reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake, and found none. The court adopted the recommendation in its entirety.

Ruling

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the case with prejudice. The opinion does not state the grounds for dismissal because it adopts the recommendation without explaining its underlying analysis. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion, mail a copy of the order to Rose pro se, meaning without a lawyer, and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.