Hobson v. Matucello
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-05029
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Hobson v. Matucello, Judge Swain dismissed the federal claims, declined state-law jurisdiction, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Anthony E. Hobson’s federal and state-law claims were dismissed or declined jurisdiction, and his request to appeal without paying filing fees was denied.
What happened
Hobson v. Matucello involved Anthony E. Hobson’s complaint against Acting Commissioner Daniel F. Matucello, III, and other defendants.
The court had ordered Hobson to file an amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal. Hobson did not file an amended complaint.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed Hobson’s federal claims for failure to state a valid claim and declined to hear the state-law claims. She also denied fee-free appeal status and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Hobson v. Matucello · No. 1:24-cv-05029
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 3, 2025
Background
On October 21, 2024, the Court ordered Anthony E. Hobson to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal of the complaint. Hobson did not file an amended complaint.
Ruling
The Court dismissed Hobson’s federal claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. This means the Court concluded that the federal claims, as presented, did not state a legally sufficient basis for relief. The opinion does not provide additional analysis of the underlying claims.
The Court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Hobson’s state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). Supplemental jurisdiction is the court’s authority to hear related state-law claims alongside federal claims. The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment.
Appeal-related ruling
The Court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Hobson permission to proceed without paying the appeal filing fees. The order does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.