Tamarez v. Hochul
- Gregory Woods
- 1:21-cv-10678
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Tamarez v. Hochul, Judge Woods granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss after adopting a report finding no standing and other pleading problems.
The ruling ended Madelyn Tamarez’s case against Kathleen Hochul and the other defendants by granting the defendants’ motions to dismiss, entering judgment for the defendants, and closing the case. It also denied fee-free appeal status for any appeal.
What happened
In Tamarez v. Hochul, Magistrate Judge Cave recommended granting, with prejudice, two motions to dismiss filed by the two groups of defendants. The motions challenged claims brought by Madelyn Tamarez.
The report found that Tamarez lacked the required legal connection to bring her claims. It also concluded that, even if she had that connection, the claims were either no longer a live dispute or were not adequately stated.
No one objected to the report within the required time. Judge Woods found no clear error, adopted the report in full, and granted the motions to dismiss. The court entered judgment for the defendants, closed the case, and denied fee-free appeal status.
The detailed version
- Tamarez v. Hochul · No. 1:21-cv-10678
- Gregory Woods
- July 17, 2023
Background
On June 30, 2023, Magistrate Judge Cave issued a report and recommendation advising the district court to grant, with prejudice, two motions to dismiss filed by the two groups of defendants. The plaintiff was Madelyn Tamarez, and the defendants included Kathleen Hochul, identified in the caption as Governor of New York, and other defendants.
Report and Recommendation
The report concluded that Tamarez lacked standing, meaning she had not shown the required connection to the alleged harm that would allow her to bring the claims. It further concluded that, even if she had standing, the claims were moot or were not plausibly pleaded. A claim is moot when there is no longer a live dispute for the court to resolve; a claim is plausibly pleaded when the complaint alleges enough facts to make the requested relief legally supportable.
District Court Review
Under the governing procedure, the district court could accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge’s recommendations. Because no party submitted an objection within the fourteen-day period, Judge Woods reviewed the report for clear error. He found no clear error and accepted and adopted the report in its entirety.
Ruling and Effect
The court granted the motions to dismiss. The order also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status for that purpose. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Tamarez, enter judgment for the defendants, and close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.