Douglas v. Walmart
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-05448
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Douglas v. Walmart, Chief Judge Swain dismissed the duplicate action without prejudice, preserving claims in the earlier case.
Willoughby Douglas and Lovecora Douglas, whose duplicate action was dismissed while their claims in the earlier case remained available for litigation.
What happened
Willoughby Douglas and Lovecora Douglas filed a new complaint against Walmart and other defendants while they were already pursuing the same claims against the same defendants in an earlier case. The court believed the new complaint was submitted by mistake because it was substantially similar to the amended complaint filed in the earlier case two days before.
The plaintiffs did not pay the $405 filing fee or ask to waive it by applying to proceed without paying court fees. The Clerk’s Office nevertheless opened the new case.
In Douglas v. Walmart, Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed this action without prejudice to the plaintiffs’ litigation of their claims in the earlier case. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and directed the Clerk to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Douglas v. Walmart · No. 1:25-cv-05448
- Laura Swain
- July 15, 2025
Background
Willoughby Douglas and Lovecora Douglas, who were proceeding without lawyers, filed a complaint in this action on June 27, 2025. They did not pay the $405 fee required to start a new civil action and did not submit an application asking to proceed without paying the fee.
The court learned that the plaintiffs were already litigating a case against the same defendants and asserting the same claims. In that earlier case, the plaintiffs had filed an amended complaint on June 25, 2025. The court found that the amended complaint was substantially similar to the complaint filed in this action and believed that the new complaint had been submitted by mistake.
Ruling
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed this action because it was a duplicate complaint. The dismissal was without prejudice to the plaintiffs’ litigation of their claims in the earlier case, No. 24-CV-3030 (KMK) (VR) (S.D.N.Y.).
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the appellate filing fees. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.