Brock v. The City of New York

Background

Mandela Brock, who represented himself, brought a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for violations of constitutional rights by persons acting under state law. Brock alleged that his constitutional rights were violated in connection with his access to temporary housing. The defendants included the City of New York, ACACIA Network and several of its employees, and Services for the Underserved and several of its employees.

Motion and Recommendation

The City of New York moved to dismiss Brock’s amended complaint. The district court referred that motion to Magistrate Judge Gorenstein, who issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the City’s motion be granted.

Neither Brock nor the City filed objections within the applicable fourteen-day period. The court explained that failing to object after receiving clear notice generally waives judicial review of the recommendation. That rule is not jurisdictional, however, so the court independently checked the recommendation for clear error on the face of the record.

Ruling

Judge Gardephe reviewed the nine-page recommendation and found it thorough, well-reasoned, and free of clear error. The court adopted the recommendation in its entirety and granted the City of New York’s motion to dismiss. The court stated that the dismissal was with prejudice because Brock had previously been given permission to amend his claims against the City. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion and terminate the City of New York as a defendant.

The opinion provided here does not set out the underlying reasons in the recommendation for dismissing Brock’s claims against the City.