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

Grabowski v. Miller

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-08888
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Grabowski v. Miller, Judge Swain dismissed the habeas petition without prejudice because Grabowski neither paid the filing fee nor submitted a request to proceed without paying.

Who this affects

Stephanie Grabowski's habeas petition was dismissed without prejudice because she did not pay the $5 filing fee or submit the required application to proceed without paying it; the court also denied permission to appeal without paying the fee.

What happened

In Grabowski v. Miller, Stephanie Grabowski filed a petition asking for a court order concerning her detention. The court had ordered her to submit a completed request to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the required $5 fee within 30 days.

Grabowski did neither. The court therefore dismissed the petition without prejudice, meaning it was not permanently barred on that basis.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue, denied permission to appeal without paying the fee, and directed the clerk to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Grabowski v. Miller · No. 1:24-cv-08888
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 24, 2025

Background

Stephanie Grabowski filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a request for judicial relief concerning detention, against Warden Miller and the NYC Department of Correction. In an order dated November 26, 2024, the court directed Grabowski, within 30 days, either to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the $5 filing fee required for the petition.

Court’s ruling

The prior order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal. Grabowski did not submit the application or pay the fee. The court therefore dismissed the petition without prejudice, using the court’s stated disposition. The order did not address the underlying habeas claim.

The court also ruled that no certificate of appealability would issue because the petition made no substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the fee. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment.

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.