Moore v. City of New York
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-04587
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Moore v. City of New York, Chief Judge Swain dismissed Moore’s amended complaint for failure to state a claim and denied another amendment.
Ali Moore’s federal claims were dismissed for failure to state a claim; any state-law claims were not considered under supplemental jurisdiction. The court also denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
In Moore v. City of New York, Ali Moore alleged that two people he believed were undercover officers approached him at a Manhattan party on June 13, 2021. He said their conversation intimidated him, but he did not describe what they said.
The court had previously dismissed Moore’s original complaint for failing to state a claim and gave him 30 days to amend it. Moore filed an amended complaint, but it repeated the same facts. The court also declined to consider any state-law claims under its supplemental jurisdiction.
Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the amended complaint for failure to state a claim, declined to give Moore another chance to amend, and directed the Clerk to enter judgment. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal after finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Moore v. City of New York · No. 1:24-cv-04587
- Laura Swain
- Jan. 29, 2025
Background
Ali Moore, who was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee, sued the City of New York and other defendants. He alleged that, on June 13, 2021, while attending a party in Manhattan, two individuals whom he believed were undercover officers approached him and engaged him in a conversation he did not enjoy. Moore said the encounter caused him to feel intimidated, but he did not describe the conversation.
Earlier Proceedings and Amended Complaint
In an October 25, 2024 order, the court dismissed the original complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and allowed Moore 30 days to file an amended complaint. The court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction—the authority to hear related state-law claims—over any state-law claims Moore may have asserted.
Moore filed an amended complaint on December 27, 2024. The court found that the amended pleading repeated the exact same facts as the original complaint. Because Moore had already received an opportunity to correct the complaint’s deficiencies, the court declined to allow another amendment.
Ruling
The court dismissed Moore’s amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. It again declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims. The court directed the Clerk to terminate Moore’s motion to correct errors in the amended complaint and to enter judgment.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.