Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 24, 2025

Madrid v. Miller

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-11026
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Madrid v. Miller, Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied fee-free appeal status, citing a prior order.

Who this affects

Jose Icu Madrid, whose action was dismissed and whose permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal was denied.

What happened

In Madrid v. Miller, Jose Icu Madrid brought an action against Supt. Mark Miller. The judgment does not explain the underlying claims or provide the January 22, 2025 order’s reasoning.

The court dismissed the action. It also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Madrid permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the judgment on January 24, 2025. The judgment does not state why the action was dismissed beyond referring to the earlier order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Madrid v. Miller · No. 1:23-cv-11026
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 24, 2025

Background

Jose Icu Madrid is identified as the petitioner, and Supt. Mark Miller is identified as the respondent. The judgment itself does not describe the claims, the underlying dispute, or the January 22, 2025 order referenced by the court.

Ruling

The court stated that, for the reasons given in its January 22, 2025 order, “this action is dismissed.” The judgment does not specify whether the dismissal reached the merits or rested on a threshold ground.

The court also 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 permission to proceed without paying court fees for purposes of an appeal. Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the judgment.

Effect

The action was dismissed, and the petitioner was denied fee-free status for an appeal. The provided text does not state the basis for dismissal or otherwise explain the petitioner’s 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.