Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 20, 2025

Moore v. City of New York

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-06635
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Moore v. City of New York, Judge Swain reopened the action by granting reconsideration after Moore submitted an application to proceed without paying fees.

Who this affects

Ali Moore and the defendants in the reopened action.

What happened

Ali Moore filed Moore v. City of New York without a lawyer. The court had dismissed the action because Moore had not paid the required fees or submitted an application to proceed without paying them.

Moore later asked the court to reconsider and submitted the required application. The court granted the reconsideration motion and directed the Clerk of Court to vacate the dismissal order and civil judgment and reopen the action. The court said it would decide the application in a separate order.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying appeal fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Moore v. City of New York · No. 1:24-cv-06635
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Feb. 20, 2025

Background

Ali Moore filed the action without a lawyer. On November 15, 2024, the court dismissed the action because Moore had not paid the required filing fees or submitted an application to proceed without paying them.

On December 16, 2024, Moore filed a motion asking the court to reconsider the dismissal and submitted an application to proceed without paying the filing fees.

Ruling

Because Moore submitted the application, the court granted the motion for reconsideration. It directed the Clerk of Court to vacate the dismissal order and the civil judgment identified as ECF 10-11 and to reopen the action. The court stated that it would issue a separate order deciding Moore’s application.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.

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.