Jones v. Falco
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-03485
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Jones v. Falco, Judge Briccetti ordered Jones to update his address and attend a conference, warning that noncompliance could lead to dismissal.
The order directly affects Corderro Javon Jones, who was required to update his address and participate in the case, and the defendants, Lt. Falco and Sgt. Carr, whose counsel appeared at the conference.
What happened
Jones v. Falco concerns a lawsuit brought by Corderro Javon Jones, who was proceeding without a lawyer. Jones had repeatedly been reminded to update the court about his address. He did not appear at the December 13, 2022, case-management conference and had not provided a current address.
The court ordered Jones to provide his current address in writing by January 10, 2023. It also scheduled another conference for January 20, 2023, and required Jones or his lawyer to attend. The court warned that failing to update his address or attend without an explanation would be treated as abandoning the case and could result in dismissal for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders.
Judge Briccetti also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Jones permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The court did not dismiss the case in this order.
The detailed version
- Jones v. Falco · No. 7:20-cv-03485
- Vincent Briccetti
- Dec. 13, 2022
Background
Corderro Javon Jones, proceeding without a lawyer, filed this action on May 5, 2020. The court repeatedly instructed him to notify the court in writing of any address change. The opinion states that Jones missed an earlier case-management conference after being transferred between correctional facilities, although he later notified the court of one transfer. In July 2021, the court directed the Clerk to update his address to USP Victorville.
The court also states that it denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on August 25, 2022. At an October 6, 2022, conference, Jones said he expected to be released soon and move to a residential reentry facility in New York. The court then scheduled an in-person conference for December 13, 2022, directed the parties to discuss settlement in good faith, reminded Jones to report address changes, and required Jones or his lawyer to attend.
December 13 Conference
The defendants’ lawyer appeared in person at the scheduled conference, but Jones did not appear and did not provide an excuse or explanation. The court stated that his failure to appear or request an adjournment wasted the time of the court and defense counsel. The court further stated that Jones had not notified it of any address change. Based on Bureau of Prisons information and information from Jones’s probation officer, the court identified possible places where Jones might be located, but the opinion does not establish which was his current address.
Order
The court ordered Jones to update his current address in writing by January 10, 2023. It warned that failure to do so would cause the court to deem the case abandoned and dismiss it for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The court also scheduled a case-management conference for January 20, 2023, at the White Plains courthouse. If Jones had retained counsel, counsel was directed to attend; otherwise, Jones was required to attend in person. The court again warned that failing to appear without an excuse or explanation would lead it to deem the case abandoned and dismiss it under Rule 41(b).
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fees. This order itself did not dismiss the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.