Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 4, 2024

Milchamot v. Bronx District Attorney's Office

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-09101
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Milchamot v. Bronx District Attorney's Office, Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied appeal-related IFP status.

Who this affects

Yehudah Milchamot, whose action was dismissed, and the defendants named in the caption, including the Bronx District Attorney's Office.

What happened

In Milchamot v. Bronx District Attorney's Office, the court entered judgment dismissing Yehudah Milchamot's action against the Bronx District Attorney's Office and other defendants.

The judgment says the dismissal was based on reasons given in a December 1, 2024 order, but that order is not included here. The available text therefore does not explain the court's reason for dismissing the action.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status for any appeal. The judgment is dated December 4, 2024.

The detailed version

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

Case
Milchamot v. Bronx District Attorney's Office · No. 1:24-cv-09101
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Dec. 4, 2024

Disposition

The court entered a civil judgment dismissing the action. It stated that the dismissal was for the reasons explained in the court's December 1, 2024 order. That order is not included in the provided opinion text, so the basis for dismissal cannot be determined from this judgment alone.

Appeal-related ruling

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied the plaintiff fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The judgment cites Coppedge v. United States for that certification.

Effect

The action was dismissed, but the provided text does not specify whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice, identify the claims involved, or explain whether the court reached their merits. This is classified as a procedural order because the available judgment disposes of the action without stating that the court decided the underlying legal claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.