Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 16, 2025

Alfonso v. Otis Bantum Correctional Facility

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-09640
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Alfonso v. City of New York, Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied appeal-related in forma pauperis status.

Who this affects

The action brought by Jensi Alfonso was dismissed. The judgment also affects any appeal by denying permission to proceed without paying filing fees and certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

What happened

In Jensi Alfonso v. The City of New York, et al., the court entered a civil judgment dismissing the action. The judgment states that the dismissal was based on reasons given in a May 14, 2025 order, but that order is not included here.

The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Jensi Alfonso permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the judgment on May 16, 2025. The available judgment does not explain why the action was dismissed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Alfonso v. Otis Bantum Correctional Facility · No. 1:24-cv-09640
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 16, 2025

Ruling

The court entered a civil judgment dismissing the action. It stated that the reasons for dismissal were set out in a May 14, 2025 order, which is not included in the provided opinion text.

Appeal-related ruling

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. As a result, it denied in forma pauperis status—that is, permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees—for purposes of an appeal.

What the available text does not say

The judgment does not identify the claims, explain the basis for dismissal, or state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice. The caption identifies the defendants as “THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL.”

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.