Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 15, 2023

Petties v. Smalls

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:20-cv-04350
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Petties v. Smalls, Judge Carter dismissed the action without prejudice after adopting a recommendation based on failure to prosecute and update contact information.

Who this affects

The ruling affected Timothy Derome Petties's action against Kisha Smalls and the other named defendants. The court closed the case without prejudice because Petties failed to prosecute it and failed to update his contact information.

What happened

Timothy Derome Petties, who was representing himself, sued Kisha Smalls and others over alleged violations of his constitutional rights during his detention on Rikers Island. He stopped communicating with the court after filing an amended complaint and did not update his address despite multiple notices.

A magistrate judge recommended dismissing the case because Petties failed to prosecute it and failed to keep the court informed of his contact information. Petties did not object to that recommendation.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. found no clear error and adopted the recommendation in its entirety. The court dismissed the action without prejudice under Rule 41(b), directed the clerk to enter judgment and close the case, and ordered that the decision be mailed to Petties at his last known address.

The detailed version

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

Case
Petties v. Smalls · No. 1:20-cv-04350
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Feb. 15, 2023

Background

Timothy Derome Petties, Esq., filed this action without a lawyer on June 5, 2020. He alleged violations of his federal constitutional rights during his detention on Rikers Island and listed the North Infirmary Command Facility as his address. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave.

The opinion states that Petties had not communicated with the court since filing his amended complaint on August 20, 2020—more than two years before the magistrate judge's recommendation. Despite multiple court notices, he did not update his address or otherwise prosecute the case.

Report and Recommendation

On November 22, 2022, Magistrate Judge Cave recommended dismissing Petties's claims for failure to prosecute and failure to update his contact information. The court notified Petties of his right to object, but he filed no objections.

When no timely objection is filed, the court may adopt a magistrate judge's recommendation if the record shows no clear error. Judge Carter stated that he found no clear error in the record.

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. For the reasons stated in that recommendation, the court dismissed the action without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The clerk was directed to enter judgment and close the case and to mail a copy of the order to Petties at his last known address.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.