Merritt v. Snyder

Filing 8

ORDER. The Court hereby ORDERS that the Report-Recommendation, Dkt. No. #7 , is ADOPTED in its entirety. The Court further ORDERS that Plaintiff's Complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice. The Court further ORDERS that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on all parties in accordance with the Local Rules. Signed by U.S. District Judge Anne M. Nardacci on 3/6/2025. (Copy served upon pro se plaintiff regular mail; copy of unpublished decisions served upon pro se plaintiff). (mab)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
KATIE MERRITT, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.

3:25-CV-61 (AMN/DJS)

ADAM SNYDER,
Defendant.
APPEARANCES:
KATIE MERRITT
P.O. Box 84
Vestal, New York 13851
Plaintiff, pro se
Hon. Anne M. Nardacci, United States District Judge:
ORDER
I.

INTRODUCTION
On January 11, 2025, Plaintiff Katie Merritt and her children B.K., A.K., S.S., C.S., and

B.J.K, commenced this action pro se against Adam Snyder alleging physical and emotional abuse
from April 2017 to January 2025. See Dkt. No. 1 (“Complaint”).
This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Stewart, who reviewed
the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), and on February 11, 2025, recommended that the
Complaint be dismissed without prejudice due to a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Dkt.
No. 7 at 7 (“Report-Recommendation”).1 Magistrate Judge Stewart advised that pursuant to 28

1

Citations to court documents utilize the pagination generated by CM/ECF, the Court’s electronic
filing system.

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Parties had fourteen days within which to file written objections and that
failure to object to the Report-Recommendation within fourteen days would preclude appellate
review. Id. No objections have been filed, and the time for filing objections has expired.
For the reasons set forth below, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation in its
entirety.
II.

STANDARD OF REVIEW
This Court reviews de novo those portions of a magistrate judge’s report-recommendation

that have been properly preserved with a specific objection. Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223,
228-29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). If no specific objections have been filed, this
Court reviews a magistrate judge’s report-recommendation for clear error. See Petersen, 2 F.
Supp. 3d at 229 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes: 1983 Addition). “When
performing such a ‘clear error’ review, ‘the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error
on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.’” Dezarea W. v. Comm’r of Soc.
Sec., No. 6:21-CV-01138 (MAD/TWD), 2023 WL 2552452, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 17, 2023)
(quoting Canady v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 1:17-CV-0367 (GTS/WBC), 2017 WL 5484663, at
*1 n.1 (N.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2017)).
“[I]n a pro se case, the court must view the submissions by a more lenient standard than
that accorded to ‘formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.’” Govan v. Campbell, 289 F. Supp. 2d 289,
295 (N.D.N.Y. 2003) (quoting Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972)) (additional citations
omitted). The Second Circuit has held that courts are obligated to “make reasonable allowances
to protect pro se litigants” from inadvertently forfeiting legal rights merely because they lack a
legal education. Id. (quoting Traguth v. Zuck, 710 F.2d 90, 95 (2d Cir. 1983)). After appropriate

2

review, “the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
III.

DISCUSSION
Because neither party has filed any objections to the Report-Recommendation, the Court

reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error.
Magistrate Judge Stewart first noted that Plaintiff may intend to assert claims on behalf of
her children. Dkt. No. 7 at 4. The Court finds no clear error in the Report-Recommendation’s
finding that Plaintiff may not do so because, generally, “a parent not admitted to the bar cannot
bring an action pro se in federal court on behalf of his or her child.” Id. at 4-5 (quoting Tindall v.
Pultney High School Dist., 414 F.3d 281, 284-85 (2d Cir. 2005)).
Next, Magistrate Judge Stewart found that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over
the claims asserted in the Complaint. Id. at 5. The Court finds no clear error in the ReportRecommendation’s determination that the Complaint asserts no basis for federal question
jurisdiction. The stated causes of action—assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional
distress, and negligence—are all “traditional state common law questions that do not ‘arise under’
federal law.” Id. at 6 (quoting Gray v. Amazon, 1:20-CV-715 (MAD/DJS), 2020 WL 8474763, at
*1 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2020), report and recommendation adopted sub nom. Gray on behalf of
B.G. v. Amazon, 1:20-cv-715 (MAD/DJS), 2021 WL 129051 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 14, 2021)). The
Court also finds no clear error in the Report-Recommendation’s determination that the action lacks
complete diversity. Diversity exists “only if there is no plaintiff and no defendant who are citizens
of the same State[,]” Wisconsin Dep’t of Corr. v. Schact, 524 U.S. 381, 388 (1998), yet the
Complaint alleges that both Plaintiff Merritt and Defendant are residents of New York. Id. at 6
(citing Dkt. No. 1 at 2). Finally, the Court finds no clear error in the recommendation that the

3

Complaint be dismissed without prejudice. Id. (citing Katz v. Donna Karan Co., LLC, 872 F.3d
114, 121 (2d Cir. 2017)).
Having reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error, and found none, the Court
adopts the Report-Recommendation in its entirety.
IV.

CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the Court hereby
ORDERS that the Report-Recommendation, Dkt. No. 7, is ADOPTED in its entirety;

and the Court further
ORDERS that Plaintiff’s Complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice; and the Court
further
ORDERS that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on all parties in accordance with the
Local Rules.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 6, 2025
Albany, New York

2

The Clerk shall also provide Plaintiff with copies of all unreported decisions cited herein.
4