Slade v. City of New York
- Jesse Furman
- 1:24-cv-00514
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Slade v. City of New York, Judge Furman granted defendants’ motions to dismiss, declined amendment, closed the case, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Slade’s case was closed, and the City of New York and the other defendants received judgment in their favor. Slade was also denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees.
What happened
In Slade v. City of New York, the court entered judgment after relying on a June 18, 2025 memorandum opinion and order. The judgment does not explain the claims or the reasons for dismissal.
The court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss, declined to give Slade permission to amend, entered judgment for the defendants, and closed the case. It also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Slade permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
Judge Jesse Furman is identified as the judge in the case information provided. The judgment was dated June 20, 2025, and signed by the court clerk’s office.
The detailed version
- Slade v. City of New York · No. 1:24-cv-00514
- Jesse Furman
- June 20, 2025
What the judgment says
The judgment states that, for the reasons given in the court’s memorandum opinion and order dated June 18, 2025, the defendants’ motions to dismiss were granted. The judgment does not include the underlying claims, the defendants’ arguments, or the court’s reasoning from the June 18 memorandum opinion and order.
The court also declined to grant Slade permission to amend the pleading on its own initiative. It entered judgment in favor of the defendants and closed the case.
Appeal-related ruling
The court certified under 18 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the memorandum opinion and order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without prepaying appellate filing fees. The judgment cites Coppedge v. United States for this ruling.
Disposition
The defendants’ motions to dismiss were granted. Leave to amend was not granted. Judgment was entered for the defendants, and the case was closed. The opinion text does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.