Paruolo v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company

Filing 73

SHORT FORM ORDER adopting 71 Report and Recommendation; Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, the Court has reviewed the R&Rs for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both their reasoning and results. Accordingly, the Panels February 22, 2016 Reports and Recommendations are adopted in their entirety, and the above-captioned Hurricane Sandy Cases are dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close these cases. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 5/9/16. cm by cm/ecf to Judgment Clerk; cm to Harbatkin & Levasseur, P.A. via first class mail. (Coleman, Laurie)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------x
IN RE HURRICANE SANDY CASES

14-mc-0041 (CLP)(GRB)(RER)

----------------------------------------------------------------x
CATHERINE PETOSKE,
Plaintiff,

SHORT FORM ORDER

-against-

14-cv-3364 (ADS)(GRB)

TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
----------------------------------------------------------------x
JOHN ZAREMBA,
Plaintiff,
-against-

14-cv-3486 (ADS)(GRB)

TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
----------------------------------------------------------------x
PATRICK PARUOLO,
Plaintiff,
-againstNATIONWIDE
COMPANY,

14-cv-3404 (ADS)(SIL)
MUTUAL

FIRE

INSURANCE

Defendant.
----------------------------------------------------------------x
APPEARANCES:
Harbatkin & Levasseur, P.A.
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
616 E. Palisades Avenue, Suite 102
Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
By: Audwin F. Levasseur, Esq., Of Counsel

1

NO APPEARANCES:
The Defendants
SPATT, District Judge:
The parties’ familiarity with the relevant facts and procedural history of these cases,
which were set forth in greater detail in this Court’s prior order, dated April 22, 2016, is
presumed.
Relevant here, on February 22, 2016, a panel of United States Magistrate Judges (the
“Panel”), which was designated to preside over actions seeking insurance coverage for
damage caused by Hurricane Sandy (“Hurricane Sandy Cases”), issued identical Reports
and Recommendations (“R&Rs”) in the above-referenced cases. In particular, the Panel
recommended that these cases be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute,
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Fed. R. Civ. P.”) 41.
On April 22, 2016, this Court acknowledged the extended history of inactivity
plaguing these cases, but recognized that the Plaintiffs may not have received notice of all
relevant developments. Thus, noting the extreme nature of the recommended relief, the
Court, in an abundance of caution, directed the Clerk of the Court to mail copies of its order
to each of the Plaintiffs, together with additional copies of the Panel’s underlying R&Rs.
The court’s electronic docketing system reflects that the Clerk complied with this directive
on the same day.
The April 22, 2016 order further provided that the Plaintiffs would have 14 days
from the date of the mailing to object to the relief recommended by the Panel, or request an
extension of time to do so. However, more than 14 days have now passed and each of the

2

Plaintiffs has failed to file an objection; request an extension of time to do so; or otherwise
appear in these actions.
Thus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, the Court has reviewed
the R&Rs for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both their reasoning and results.
Accordingly, the Panel’s February 22, 2016 Reports and Recommendations are adopted in
their entirety, and the above-captioned Hurricane Sandy Cases are dismissed with
prejudice.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to close these cases.
It is SO ORDERED.
Dated:

Central Islip, New York
May 9, 2016
/s/ Arthur D. Spatt____________________________
ARTHUR D. SPATT
United States District Judge

3