Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 23, 2023

Swartz v. 44 Lexington Associates, LLC

Judge
Rearden
Docket
1:23-cv-07601
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Swartz v. 44 Lexington Associates, LLC, Judge Rearden dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

Who this affects

Helen Swartz’s case against 44 Lexington Associates, LLC was dismissed without prejudice because she did not take the steps the court ordered to move the case forward.

What happened

In Swartz v. 44 Lexington Associates, LLC, Helen Swartz sued 44 Lexington Associates, LLC. The defendant was served but did not respond or appear by the deadline.

The court ordered Swartz to explain why the case should not be dismissed and told her she could request a default certificate and file a motion for default judgment. Swartz did neither and took no other action to move the case forward.

Judge Jennifer H. Rearden dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and the court’s inherent power. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Swartz v. 44 Lexington Associates, LLC · No. 1:23-cv-07601
Judge
Rearden
Date
Oct. 23, 2023

Background

Helen Swartz filed a complaint and then an amended complaint. The defendant, 44 Lexington Associates, LLC, was served on September 19, 2023. Its response was due on October 10, 2023, but it did not respond to the complaint or otherwise appear.

Court’s Order to Show Cause

On October 12, 2023, the court ordered Swartz to show why the action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. The order stated that Swartz could show cause by requesting a certificate of default from the Clerk of Court and filing a motion for default judgment by October 20, 2023. The court warned that failing to file a timely and proper motion could result in dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.

Swartz did not request a certificate of default, file a motion for default judgment, or otherwise take action to make progress in the case.

Ruling

Judge Jennifer H. Rearden dismissed the case, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b) and the court’s inherent power. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

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.