Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 7, 2024

Holliday v. Artist

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:23-cv-02410
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Motion to DismissCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Holliday v. Artist, Judge Halpern granted C.O. Artist’s motion to dismiss Dorian Holliday’s time-barred claim with prejudice and closed the case.

Who this affects

Dorian Holliday’s claim against C.O. Artist was dismissed with prejudice; the case was closed, and fee-free appeal status was denied.

What happened

In Holliday v. Artist, the court granted Defendant C.O. Artist’s motion to dismiss Dorian Holliday’s claim. The judgment states that the claim was barred by the applicable filing deadline.

The court dismissed the claim with prejudice because changing the complaint would be futile. It also denied permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal and closed the case.

Judge Halpern issued the ruling referred to in the judgment dated June 7, 2024. The judgment was entered by the court clerk.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Holliday v. Artist · No. 7:23-cv-02410
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
June 7, 2024

Ruling

The court granted Defendant C.O. Artist’s motion to dismiss. It stated that Dorian Holliday’s claim was time-barred, meaning it was filed after the applicable statute of limitations had expired. Because amendment would be futile, the claim was dismissed with prejudice.

Appeal and Case Status

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Holliday permission to proceed without paying the required fees for an appeal. The case was closed.

Scope of the Provided Text

The provided document is a judgment that refers to a separate Opinion and Order dated June 7, 2024. It does not explain the underlying claim or the court’s complete statute-of-limitations analysis.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.