“Where parties receive clear notice of the consequences, failure timely to object to a magistrate’s report and recommendation operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the magistrate’s decision.”
How later courts described this case
- “Where parties receive clear notice of the consequences, failure timely to object to a magistrate’s report and recommendation operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the magistrate’s decision.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------x
THE SECRETARY OF THE U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT, an agency of
the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, Case No. 22-CV-7925-FB-RER
-against-
KINGS COUNTY PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATOR, as Administrator of
the Estate of Dolores Sartori, deceased;
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF
TAXATION AND FINANCE; NEW
YORK CITY ENVIRONMENTAL
CONTROL BOARD; DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE CITY OF
NEW YORK; CAMELLA L. JOHNSON;
“JOHN DOE #1-5” and “JANE DOE #1-
5”, said names being fictitious,
it being the intention of plaintiff to
designate any and all occupants, tenants,
persons or corporations, if any, having
or claiming an interest in or lien upon the
premises being foreclosed herein,
Defendants.
------------------------------------------------x
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Reyes has issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”)
recommending that a default judgment of foreclosure and sale be entered in this case.
1
The R&R gave the parties 14 days to file objections and warned that “[f]ailure to file
timely objections waives the right to appeal the District Court’s Order.” R&R at 10.
It was served by mail on September 22, 2023, making objections due on October 9,
2023. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d). No objections have been filed.
Where clear notice has been given of the consequences of failure to object, and
there are no objections, the Court may adopt the R&R without de novo review. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); Mario v. P & C Food Mkts., Inc., 313
F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) (“Where parties receive clear notice of the consequences,
failure timely to object to a magistrate’s report and recommendation operates as a
waiver of further judicial review of the magistrate’s decision.”). The Court will,
however, excuse the failure to object and conduct de novo review if it appears that the
magistrate judge may have committed plain error. See Spence v. Superintendent, Great
Meadow Corr. Facility, 219 F.3d 162, 174 (2d Cir. 2000).
No error, plain or otherwise, appears on the face of the R&R, so the Court adopts
it without de novo review. Accordingly, the Clerk shall enter judgment (1) ordering the
foreclosure and sale of 1578 East 34th Street, Brooklyn, New York 11234, (2)
appointing Frank Pellegrini to conduct the sale, (3) directing that Pellegrini receive a
fee of $750 from the proceeds of the sale, (4) directing that the plaintiff receive
$917,033.01, plus costs of $1,133.36 and post-judgment interest, from the proceeds of
2
the sale, and (5) dismissing defendants “John Doe #1-5” and “Jane Doe #1-5.”
SO ORDERED.
_/S/ Frederic Block___________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
October 31, 2023
3