Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 2, 2025

Scales v. Door Dash

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-02627
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Scales v. Door Dash, Judge Swain dismissed the action and certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

Who this affects

The action brought by William Scales and the other named plaintiffs against Door Dash was dismissed. The provided judgment does not identify the plaintiffs’ claims or explain the dismissal’s practical effects beyond the stated judgment and appeal certification.

What happened

In William Scales, et al. v. Door Dash, the court dismissed the action for the reasons given in a June 26, 2025 order. The judgment itself does not describe those reasons or the claims.

The court also certified under federal law that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. It cited a Supreme Court decision explaining when an appeal presents a nonfrivolous issue.

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered the civil judgment on July 2, 2025, in the Southern District of New York.

The detailed version

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

Case
Scales v. Door Dash · No. 1:25-cv-02627
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 2, 2025

Disposition

The court stated that, for the reasons in its June 26, 2025 order, “this action is dismissed.” The opinion provided here does not include the June 26 order, so it does not explain the claims, the parties’ arguments, or the legal basis for dismissal.

Appeal Certification

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. The court cited Coppedge v. United States, which explains that an appellant demonstrates good faith by seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue.

Judge and Date

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the judgment, which was dated July 2, 2025, in New York, New York.

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.