Porath v. City of New York
- John Cronan
- 1:22-cv-01302
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Porath v. City of New York, Judge Cronan adopted the recommendation, dismissing Bellevue claims with prejudice and the remaining claims without prejudice.
David K. Porath’s claims against the City of New York, Bellevue Men’s Shelter System, and Obumneme Akaneme were dismissed; the claims against Bellevue cannot be refiled, while the other dismissed claims could be amended under the order.
What happened
In Porath v. City of New York, David K. Porath sued the City of New York, Bellevue Men’s Shelter System, and New York State Parole Officer Obumneme Akaneme under federal civil-rights law and New York law. The defendants asked the court to dismiss his amended complaint.
A magistrate judge recommended granting the dismissal motions. The recommendation called for dismissing the claims against Bellevue with prejudice, dismissing the federal claims against the City and Akaneme without prejudice, and dismissing the New York-law claims without prejudice. No party objected, although the court independently reviewed the recommendation.
Judge John P. Cronan adopted the recommendation in full and dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice, except for the claims against Bellevue, which he dismissed with prejudice. He allowed Porath to file a second amended complaint addressing the claims dismissed without prejudice by February 12, 2024, and denied fee-free appeal status.
The detailed version
- Porath v. City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-01302
- John Cronan
- Jan. 11, 2024
Background
David K. Porath brought claims against the City of New York, Bellevue Men’s Shelter System (identified in the opinion as “Bellevue”), and New York State Parole Officer Obumneme Akaneme. The claims arose under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that permits certain civil-rights claims, and New York State law. Bellevue and the City filed one motion to dismiss the amended complaint, and Akaneme filed another.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave recommended granting both motions. She recommended dismissing Porath’s claims against Bellevue with prejudice; dismissing the § 1983 claims against the City and Akaneme without prejudice; and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the New York-law claims, which would also be dismissed without prejudice. A dismissal without prejudice permits the claims to be brought again as allowed by the court’s order, while a dismissal with prejudice does not.
The recommendation gave the parties fourteen days to object and warned that failing to object would waive the right to object and to obtain appellate review. No objections were filed by the deadline. Despite that waiver, the court conducted a de novo review, meaning an independent review, and found the recommendation well reasoned and supported.
Ruling
Judge John P. Cronan adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The court dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice, except that the claims against Bellevue were dismissed with prejudice. The court also granted Porath leave to amend under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 as to the claims dismissed without prejudice. It set February 12, 2024, as the deadline for filing a second amended complaint or obtaining an extension. If Porath did neither, the court stated that it would dismiss the case and direct the Clerk of Court to close it without further notice.
The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status. It also directed the Clerk of Court to close the two dismissal-motion docket entries and mail Porath a copy of the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.