Grogan v. New York University
- Laura Swain
- 1:20-cv-03345
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Grogan v. New York University, Judge Swain declined to adopt a dismissal recommendation and ordered that filings be sent to Grogan after his late request.
Jared J. Grogan, who was proceeding without a lawyer, received additional notice of the case filings and avoided dismissal at this stage; the defendants were required to mail him copies of their filings.
What happened
In Grogan v. New York University, a magistrate judge recommended dismissing the case because Jared J. Grogan had not kept in contact with his lawyers or the court. Grogan asked for more time after the deadline, saying his mail was not reaching the court and that he had recently been hospitalized.
Grogan’s lawyers had been allowed to withdraw, and the court had ordered him to say whether he would hire new counsel or proceed without a lawyer and provide his current address. Defendants opposed more time and said delaying the case would harm them.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain declined to adopt the recommendation to dismiss the case for failure to prosecute. She excused Grogan’s late address update and ordered the court and defendants to mail him copies of filings made since September 2022; the case remained assigned to Magistrate Judge Wang for general pretrial management.
The detailed version
- Grogan v. New York University · No. 1:20-cv-03345
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 5, 2023
Background
Jared J. Grogan requested an extension of time to review the docket and object to Magistrate Judge Wang’s December 9, 2022, report and recommendation. Judge Wang had previously granted Grogan’s counsel’s request to withdraw on November 2, 2022, after Grogan fell out of contact with his attorneys. Judge Wang then directed Grogan to inform the court whether he intended to retain new counsel or proceed without a lawyer, and, if proceeding without a lawyer, to provide his current address.
More than a month passed without a communication from Grogan. Judge Wang therefore recommended dismissing the action for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to pursue the case. The report stated that any objection was due within 14 days, but Grogan did not object by that deadline. Five days later, he wrote that his correspondence was not reaching the court, that he had submitted a change-of-address form in October 2022, and that he had recently been hospitalized and was experiencing medical problems. He requested at least 30 days to receive and review relevant materials at his new address. Defendants opposed the request and asserted that they would be prejudiced if the case were prolonged.
Ruling
Because of Grogan’s status as a person proceeding without a lawyer and his health problems, Judge Laura Taylor Swain declined at that time to adopt Judge Wang’s recommendation that the action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The court excused Grogan’s late compliance with the November 2022 order requiring him to update his address.
The court directed its chambers to mail Grogan all court-issued docket filings made since September 2022, along with a copy of the docket, at his newly reported address. It also directed defendants to mail Grogan copies of their filings from that period. The order resolved docket entry 76, and the case remained referred to Judge Wang for general pretrial management. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or decide their merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.