Lang v. Town of Somers
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:21-cv-08503
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Lang v. Town of Somers, Judge Karas dismissed the Complaint after adopting a recommendation based on Lang’s failure to prosecute.
Lavie Lang’s Complaint was dismissed for failure to prosecute, and the case was closed. The order did not decide the underlying Fourth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, or New York-law claims on their merits.
What happened
Lang v. Town of Somers concerned Lavie Lang’s claims under a federal civil-rights law, the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, and New York law. The case had been moved from New York state court to federal court.
A magistrate judge recommended dismissing the Complaint because Lang failed to prosecute the case. Lang did not object to that recommendation, so the court reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Karas adopted the recommendation in full and dismissed the Complaint. The court also declined to issue a certificate of appealability, certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, and directed the Clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Lang v. Town of Somers · No. 7:21-cv-08503
- Kenneth Karas
- Apr. 10, 2023
Background
Lavie Lang brought the action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, along with violations of New York law. The action had been removed from New York Supreme Court, Westchester County, on October 15, 2021. The court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Andrew Krause.
Report and Recommendation
The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint. Magistrate Judge Krause later issued a Report and Recommendation, commonly called an R&R, recommending that the court dismiss the Complaint because Lang had failed to prosecute the action. The R&R notified Lang that objections were due within 14 days and that failing to object or request an extension would waive the right to appeal. Lang filed no objections.
Court’s Review and Ruling
When no objections are filed to an R&R on a motion that could end the case, the court reviews the recommendation for clear error. Judge Kenneth M. Karas reviewed the Complaint and the R&R and found no substantive error. He therefore adopted the R&R in its entirety and ordered that the Complaint be dismissed.
The court also ordered that no certificate of appealability would issue because Lang had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. It certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith, directed the Clerk to mail Lang a copy of the order, and directed the Clerk to close the case. The opinion does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.