Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 7, 2025

Destiny Haughton v. City of New York

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-00366
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

Judge Swain dismissed Shaday Martinez Destiny Haughton v. City of New York without prejudice because Haughton did not file a complaint or provide a service address.

Who this affects

The action brought by Shaday Martinez Destiny Haughton against the City of New York and the New York City Department of Homeless Services was dismissed without prejudice because she did not file a complaint or comply with the court’s service-information requirement.

What happened

In Shaday Martinez Destiny Haughton v. City of New York, the plaintiff asked to proceed without paying filing fees but did not file a complaint. The defendants were the City of New York and the New York City Department of Homeless Services.

The court had ordered Haughton to file a complaint within 30 days and either provide a mailing address for court documents or agree to electronic service. She did not complete either requirement.

The court dismissed the action without prejudice and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied fee-free status for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Destiny Haughton v. City of New York · No. 1:25-cv-00366
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Mar. 7, 2025

Background

Plaintiff Shaday Martinez Destiny Haughton was proceeding without a lawyer. She filed an application to proceed without paying the filing fee, but she did not file a complaint. The defendants were the City of New York and the New York City Department of Homeless Services.

Court’s Prior Order

On January 17, 2025, the court directed Haughton to file a complaint within 30 days. The court also required her to provide a mailing address for service of court documents or submit a consent form agreeing to electronic service. The order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal.

Ruling

Haughton did not file a complaint, provide a mailing address, or consent to electronic service. The court therefore dismissed the action without prejudice. The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment and to email Haughton a copy of the order at the email address on file, as well as provide her a copy if she appeared at the court’s Pro Se Intake window.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

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.