Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 23, 2025

Barnett v. Doctor Nortin

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-04755
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Barnett v. Doctor Nortin, Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees, finding the appeal would not be taken in good faith.

Who this affects

Lafvorne L. Barnett's action was dismissed. The court also denied Barnett permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees; the judgment does not describe any separate effect on the defendants.

What happened

Lafvorne L. Barnett v. Dr. Doctor Nortin, et al., is a civil judgment entered on July 23, 2025. The judgment refers to a separate order issued that day for the reasons supporting dismissal, but that order is not included here.

The court dismissed the action. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Barnett permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees. The judgment does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the judgment as Chief United States District Judge. The supplied judgment does not explain the basis for dismissal beyond referring to the missing July 23 order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Barnett v. Doctor Nortin · No. 1:25-cv-04755
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 23, 2025

Disposition

The court entered a civil judgment stating that the action is dismissed. The judgment does not specify the legal or factual basis for dismissal; it refers to a July 23, 2025 order that is not included in the supplied text.

Appeal-related ruling

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied in forma pauperis status for an appeal, meaning permission to pursue the appeal without prepaying filing fees. The judgment does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

Effect

The action was dismissed, and the court denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees. The supplied judgment does not identify the claims, explain the dismissal, or state whether any claims may be filed again.

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.