O'BRYANT et al v. THE NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANANCY et al

Filing 76

OPINION AND ORDER Dismissing this matter with prejudice. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 5/17/2023. (dmr)(n.m.)

Case 1:17-cv-07752-NLH-AMD Document 76 Filed 05/17/23 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 699

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
KINDRA O’BRYANT;
BRIAN FLANDERS; and
ARTIE PEOPLES
Plaintiffs,
1:17-cv-07752-NLH-AMD
OPINION & ORDER

v.
SHERIFF GILBERT WILSON
"WHIP"; SHERIFF DEPUTY T.
NICHOLS; and SHERIFF DEPUTY
GURKIN
Defendants.
APPEARANCES:
Kindra O’Bryant
1320 Chase Street
Camden, NJ 08104
Plaintiff appearing Pro Se
Brian Flanders
1320 Chase Street
Camden, NJ 08104
Plaintiff appearing Pro Se
Artie Peoples
1214 N. 33rd Street
Camden, NJ 08105
Plaintiff appearing Pro Se
Howard Lane Goldberg, Esq.
Krista Schmid, Esq.
Office of Camden County Counsel
520 Market Street
Courthouse – 14th Floor
Camden, NJ 08102-1375
Representing Defendants

Page 1 of 4

Case 1:17-cv-07752-NLH-AMD Document 76 Filed 05/17/23 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 700

HILLMAN, District Judge
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2020, the Third Circuit Court of
Appeals affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded for
further proceedings the above-captioned matter after Plaintiffs
appealed a ruling by the late Honorable Jerome B. Simandle
dismissing their Complaint. See O'Bryant v. N.J. Div. of Child
Prot. & Permanency, 818 F. App’x 143, 144 (3d Cir. 2020); and
WHEREAS, also on June 16, 2020, this matter was reassigned
to this Court from the docket of Judge Simandle (ECF No. 52);
and
WHEREAS, on July 20, 2020, all Defendants except the Camden
County Sheriff Defendants again filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiffs’ Complaint (ECF No. 57); and
WHEREAS, upon review of Defendants’ renewed Motion,
Plaintiffs’ Opposition, and Defendants’ Reply, this Court
determined Moving Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity
and granted their Motion to Dismiss on February 22, 2021 (ECF
Nos. 67, 68); and
WHEREAS, on June 12, 2021, Camden County Sheriff Defendants
filed a renewed Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 69, 70); and
WHEREAS, upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Opposition to
said Motion (ECF No. 71), this Court granted the motion on
August 11, 2022 (ECF No. 74), finding the Camden County Sheriff
Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity and the claims
Page 2 of 4

Case 1:17-cv-07752-NLH-AMD Document 76 Filed 05/17/23 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 701

against them in their individual capacities must be dismissed
but granting Plaintiffs thirty (30) days to amend their
Complaint (ECF No. 73); and
WHEREAS, the deadline for Plaintiffs to cure the
deficiencies in their Complaint was September 12, 2022; and
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs have failed to file an Amended
Complaint in accordance with this Court’s Order dated August 11,
2022 (ECF No. 74); and
WHEREAS, the court’s August 11, 2022 Order specifically
warned Plaintiffs that failure to comply with the directive to
timely amend “shall result in dismissal with prejudice” (ECF No.
74); and
WHEREAS, to the extent Plaintiffs’ most recent filing (ECF
No. 75) seeks an extension of time to file an appeal, the
instant ruling constitutes a final judgment, thereby triggering
the appeal clock in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(a)(1)(A) (“In
a civil case, except as provided in Rules 4(a)(1)(B), 4(a)(4),
and 4(c), the notice of appeal required by Rule 3 must be filed
with the district clerk within 30 days after entry of the
judgment or order appealed from.”); and,
WHEREAS, to the extent Plaintiffs’ most recent filing (ECF
No. 75) seeks recusal of the undersigned on the basis of an
adverse ruling, the same is insufficient to warrant relief.

See

Gilliam v. Cavallaro, No. 22-1458, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 4270, at
Page 3 of 4

Case 1:17-cv-07752-NLH-AMD Document 76 Filed 05/17/23 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 702

*9 (Feb. 23, 2023) (“[A] party’s displeasure with legal rulings
does not form an adequate basis for recusal.”) (quoting
Securacomm Consulting, Inc. v. Securacom, Inc., 224 F.3d 273,
278 (3d Cir. 2000)) (cleaned up).
THEREFORE, it is on this 17th day of May, 2023,
ORDERED that this matter be, and the same hereby is,
DISMISSED in its entirety WITH PREJUDICE; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mark this matter
CLOSED.

/s/ Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.

At Camden, New Jersey

Page 4 of 4