Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 20, 2023

Toro v. Gator Waders, LLC

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:23-cv-05785
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Toro v. Gator Waders, Judge Carter dismissed the case without prejudice after adopting an unopposed recommendation.

Who this affects

The dismissal affected Luis Toro’s action against Gator Waders, LLC, including the proposed claims brought on behalf of others described as similarly situated. The dismissal was without prejudice.

What happened

In Toro v. Gator Waders, LLC, Luis Toro brought an action on behalf of himself and others described as similarly situated. The court had referred general pretrial matters to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave, who recommended dismissing the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The opinion does not state the underlying reason for that recommendation.

The parties were notified that they could object to the recommendation, but no objections were filed. Because there were no timely objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none in the record.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. adopted the recommendation in its entirety and dismissed the action without prejudice under Rule 41(b).

The detailed version

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

Case
Toro v. Gator Waders, LLC · No. 1:23-cv-05785
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Oct. 20, 2023

Background Luis Toro filed this action on behalf of himself and all others described as similarly situated against Gator Waders, LLC. On August 30, 2023, the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave for general pretrial matters. Judge Cave issued a Report and Recommendation advising that the action be dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The opinion does not state the underlying basis for that recommendation.

Review of the Recommendation The parties were notified of their right to object to the Report and Recommendation, but no objections were filed. When timely objections are not made, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record. The court found no clear error.

Ruling Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The court dismissed the action without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.