Reeder v. Hogan
9:09-cv-00977
N.D.N.Y.Oct 13, 2011Background
- Reeder filed a pro se prisoner's civil rights action against multiple NYS OMH and Clinton Correctional Facility officials.
- Defendants moved to dismiss under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute and noncompliance with court orders and Local Rules.
- Magistrate Judge Peebles issued a Report-Recommendation recommending dismissal for failure to prosecute; Plaintiff objected.
- The Court adopted the Report-Recommendation, granting Defendants' motion and dismissing the action with prejudice.
- Plaintiff previously filed an amended complaint; subsequent amendments did not comply with prior orders, leading to the current dismissal.
- Plaintiff argued procedural and mental-health excuses; the Court held the objections insufficient and the sanctions appropriate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal for failure to prosecute was proper | Reeder contends delays were excusable and noncompliance was not willful. | Defendants argue persistent noncompliance and delay justify dismissal under Rule 41(b). | Dismissal upheld; action dismissed in full. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mario v. P&C Food Markets, Inc., 313 F.3d 758 (2d Cir. 2002) (vague objections insufficient to preserve claims; deference to magistrate recommendations)
- Paddington Partners v. Bouchard, 34 F.3d 1132 (2d Cir. 1994) (de novo review limited; specificity required in objections)
- Camardo v. General Motors Hourly-Rate Emp. Pension Plan, 806 F. Supp. 380 (W.D.N.Y. 1992) (reiteration of objections does not constitute proper challenge)