Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 25, 2024

Perry v. Vega

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-01885
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Perry v. Vega, Chief Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice after Perry pursued the claims in another case.

Who this affects

Kahreem Perry’s action against Steven Vega was dismissed without prejudice. Perry was also denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees, while the related claims were to continue in another pending action.

What happened

In Perry v. Vega, Kahreem Perry filed a second amended complaint in another pending action that included the claims from this case and other claims.

The court treated that filing as Perry’s request to withdraw this action and granted the request. It dismissed the case without prejudice under Rule 41(a), so the dismissal did not bar refiling.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Perry permission to proceed without paying the appeal fee. Further litigation about Perry’s October 2021 arrest was to continue in the other case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Perry v. Vega · No. 1:24-cv-01885
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 25, 2024

Background

Kahreem Perry filed a second amended complaint in another pending action in the Southern District of New York, No. 1:22-CV-5813 (JHR) (SN). That complaint included the claims Perry was pursuing in this case, along with other claims. The opinion states that further litigation related to Perry’s October 2021 arrest would proceed in that other action.

Court’s action

The court understood Perry’s filing in the other action as a request to withdraw this case. It granted that request and dismissed this action without prejudice under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal itself does not bar a later refiling.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees.

Disposition and classification

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action without prejudice and denied permission to proceed without paying appeal fees. The order did not decide the underlying claims, so this is a procedural order.

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.