Russell v. Warren County Jail et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
COREY M. RUSSELL,
Plaintiff,
v.
BAILEY, Correctional Officer, Warren County
Correctional Facility,
Defendant.
9:24-cv-1109 (BKS/MJK)
Appearances:
Plaintiff pro se:
Corey M. Russell
35159
Saratoga County Jail
6010 County Farm Road
Ballston Spa, NY 12020
For Defendant:
John D. Aspland
Corey A. Ruggiero
Fitzgerald Morris Baker Firth, P.C.
68 Warren Street
Glens Falls, NY 12801
Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, Chief United States District Judge:
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Corey M. Russell brought this action pro se asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. §
1983 arising out of his detention at the Warren County Correctional Facility. (Dkt. No. 1). On
October 23, 2024, the Court issued an order, following its review of the complaint pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915A, ruling that Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment excessive force claim against
defendant Bailey survived review, and dismissing the remaining claims for failure to state a
claim. (Dkt. No. 7). On April 30, 2025, Defendant Bailey moved to dismiss the complaint under
Case 9:24-cv-01109-BKS-MJK Document 26 Filed 01/26/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute. (Dkt. No. 20). Plaintiff did not file a response to the
motion. This matter was assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Mitchell J. Katz, who on
November 21, 2025 issued a Report-Recommendation, recommending that Defendant’s motion
be granted and that Plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 21).
Magistrate Judge Katz informed the parties that they had fourteen days within which to file
written objections to the report under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and that the failure to object to the
report within fourteen days would preclude appellate review. (Id. at 13).
On December 5, 2025, the Report-Recommendation was returned to the Court marked
“Returned to Sender, Insufficient Address, Unable to Forward.” (Dkt. No. 22). As the Report-
Recommendation had been returned undeliverable, and a review of the New York State
Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) records indicated that
Plaintiff is located in DOCCS custody, the Court issued a Text Order directing Plaintiff to notify
the Court of his new address by January 5, 2026. (Dkt. No. 23). The Clerk mailed that Text
Order to Plaintiff at the Mohawk Correctional Facility. (Id.). On December 29, 2025, this
mailing was returned to the Court marked “Return to Sender – Refused to Pick Up.” (Dkt. No.
24). No objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed.
As no objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed, and the time for filing
objections has expired, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error. See
Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223, 228–29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory
committee’s note to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear
error and found none, the Court adopts the recommendation in the Report-Recommendation in
its entirety.
For these reasons, it is hereby
Case 9:24-cv-01109-BKS-MJK Document 26 Filed 01/26/26 Page 2 of 3

3
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Katz’s recommendation (Dkt. No. 21) to dismiss the
complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) without prejudice for failure to prosecute is ADOPTED;
and it is further
ORDERED that Defendant Bailey’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 20) is GRANTED; and
it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter judgment and close this case; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff in accordance with the
Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 26, 2026
Syracuse, New York
Case 9:24-cv-01109-BKS-MJK Document 26 Filed 01/26/26 Page 3 of 3