Parkes v. NYU Langone Health
- Kimba Wood
- 1:24-cv-08099
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Parkes v. NYU Langone Health, Judge Wood dismissed Tiffany Anneparkes’s amended complaint for failure to state a claim and lack of jurisdiction.
Tiffany Anneparkes’s amended complaint was dismissed; NYU Langone Health and Gramercy Gynecology were the defendants.
What happened
In Parkes v. NYU Langone Health, Tiffany Anneparkes filed an amended complaint against NYU Langone Health and Gramercy Gynecology. The judgment states that she filed the complaint without paying the filing fee under a federal process allowing certain people to proceed without payment.
The court dismissed the amended complaint because it did not state a claim for which relief could be granted and because the court lacked authority to hear the case. The judgment refers to the court’s July 21, 2025 order for the reasons supporting those rulings.
Judge Kimba Wood’s court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. The judgment was dated July 22, 2025.
The detailed version
- Parkes v. NYU Langone Health · No. 1:24-cv-08099
- Kimba Wood
- July 23, 2025
Background
Tiffany Anneparkes sued NYU Langone Health and Gramercy Gynecology. The judgment states that she filed an amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), a provision allowing a qualifying litigant to proceed without paying the filing fee.
Rulings
The court dismissed the amended complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(1). It also dismissed the matter for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3), meaning the court concluded it lacked legal authority to hear the case. The judgment says these rulings were supported by the reasons stated in the court’s July 21, 2025 order.
The court further certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Effect
The judgment ended the district-court matter by dismissing the amended complaint. The judgment 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.