Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 17, 2025

Hankerson v. HIPPA

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-01402
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Hankerson v. HIPPA, Judge Swain denied Hankerson’s request to change judges because the case was closed and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

Theresa Hankerson, whose motion to change the judge was denied and whose permission to appeal without paying filing fees was denied; the case remains closed.

What happened

In Hankerson v. HIPPA, the court had dismissed the case on August 26, 2024, for failure to state a claim, entered judgment, and closed the case.

Theresa Hankerson later filed a motion asking for a change of judge. Because the case was already closed, the court said no further activity should occur and treated the motion as unnecessary.

Judge Swain denied the motion, directed the Clerk to terminate it, and kept the case closed. Judge Swain also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hankerson v. HIPPA · No. 1:24-cv-01402
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 17, 2025

Background

The court had dismissed Theresa Hankerson’s case on August 26, 2024, for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The Clerk of Court entered judgment and terminated the case that same day.

Motion

On December 12, 2024, Hankerson filed a notice of motion requesting a “change” of judge. The opinion refers to the notice at ECF 14-15 and directs the Clerk to terminate the motion at ECF 10.

Ruling

The court denied Hankerson’s motion as unnecessary because the case was closed and stated that no further activity should take place. The action remains closed. 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 and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

Classification

This is a procedural order because it addresses an unnecessary motion in a closed case and an appeal-related filing-fee issue rather than deciding the underlying claim.

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.