Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 30, 2025

Black v. Dorsey

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-00829
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Black v. Dorsey, Judge Swain dismissed Black’s duplicate lawsuit without prejudice, waived its filing fee, and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

Cory Black, Officers Deandre Dorsey and Matthew Cabillis, and the court and prison officials handling the filing fee and prison-account instructions.

What happened

In Black v. Dorsey, Cory Black, who was incarcerated and represented himself, sued Officers Deandre Dorsey and Matthew Cabillis under a federal civil-rights law over his August 23, 2024 arrest. He had already filed a substantially similar case against the same officers based on the same arrest.

The court dismissed this lawsuit without prejudice because it duplicated the earlier pending case, identified only by docket number 25-CV-0413 (LTS). The court also directed that Black not be charged the $350 filing fee for this lawsuit and that no money be taken from his prison account for it.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. She also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Black permission to appeal without paying the required fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Black v. Dorsey · No. 1:25-cv-00829
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 30, 2025

Background

Cory Black, who was incarcerated at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center and proceeded without a lawyer, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against state actors for certain constitutional violations. He asserted claims against Officers Deandre Dorsey and Matthew Cabillis arising from his arrest on August 23, 2024, on the Upper West Side in Manhattan.

The court stated that Black had previously submitted a substantially similar complaint against the same defendants arising from the same arrest. That earlier related proceeding was pending under docket number 25-CV-0413 (LTS). The court noted that the earlier action could not proceed until Black submitted a prisoner authorization form or prepaid the filing fees.

Ruling

The court dismissed Black’s complaint without prejudice because it duplicated the pending action. The court explained that filing and litigating a duplicate lawsuit would serve no useful purpose. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal itself did not bar the matter from being pursued in the pending related proceeding.

The court directed the Clerk of Court not to charge Black the $350 filing fee for this action. It also directed that the official responsible for his custody not deduct or encumber funds from his prison trust account for this lawsuit.

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying appeal fees. It directed the Clerk of Court 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.