Brock v. CVS Corporation
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-04014
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brock v. CVS Corporation, Judge Briccetti rescheduled conferences, ordered explanations, warned of dismissal, and denied fee-waiver status for an appeal.
Terrell K. Brock, who was required to explain his missed conferences and comply with future scheduling orders; the case proceedings were rescheduled, and fee-waiver status was denied for any appeal from the order.
What happened
In Brock v. CVS Corporation, plaintiff Terrell K. Brock missed two scheduled conferences and did not provide the written explanations or postponement request the court had ordered.
The court rescheduled the initial conference for August 9, 2023, ordered Brock to explain both absences by July 25, and required any postponement request by August 2. It warned that failing to comply and missing the August conference would be treated as abandoning the case and could lead to dismissal for failure to prosecute and follow court orders.
Judge Briccetti also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Brock fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not dismiss the case at that time.
The detailed version
- Brock v. CVS Corporation · No. 7:22-cv-04014
- Vincent Briccetti
- July 11, 2023
Background
The court had scheduled an initial conference for June 14, 2023, and mailed the scheduling order to plaintiff Terrell K. Brock, who was proceeding without a lawyer and under a fee-waiver status. At the June 14 conference, counsel for the White Plains Defendants appeared, but Brock and counsel for the CVS Defendants did not. The court then rescheduled the conference for July 11 and ordered Brock and CVS Defendants’ counsel to explain their absences. It also directed Brock to request any needed postponement in writing and warned that failure to comply or appear could be treated as abandonment of the case and could result in dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which allows dismissal for failure to prosecute or follow court orders.
Brock did not submit the required explanation or a written request to postpone the July 11 conference. The court stated that its mailings to him had not been returned. At the July 11 conference, counsel for the White Plains and CVS Defendants appeared, but Brock again failed to appear without an excuse or explanation.
Order
The court rescheduled the initial conference for August 9, 2023, at 11:00 a.m. at the White Plains courthouse. It ordered Brock to explain in writing by July 25 why he missed both the June 14 and July 11 conferences. If he could not attend the August 9 conference, he was ordered to request a postponement in writing by August 2. The court also directed him to report any change of address in writing.
The court warned that if Brock failed to comply with the order and failed to appear at the August 9 conference, it would treat his failure as abandonment of the case and dismiss the case for failure to prosecute and comply with court orders. The court did not dismiss the case in this order. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.