Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 24, 2025

Freeman v. Doe

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-04721
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Freeman v. Doe, Chief Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied fee-free appeal status because any appeal would not be in good faith.

Who this affects

William Freeman’s action was dismissed. The judgment also denied him permission to appeal without paying filing fees; the opinion provides no further information about Doe.

What happened

Freeman v. Doe was dismissed for the reasons given in the court’s July 23, 2025, order. The judgment itself does not explain those reasons.

The court also decided that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied William Freeman permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered the civil judgment on July 24, 2025. The judgment does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Freeman v. Doe · No. 1:25-cv-04721
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 24, 2025

Disposition

The court dismissed the action for the reasons stated in its July 23, 2025, order. That earlier order is not included in the provided text, so the basis for dismissal cannot be determined from this judgment alone. The judgment does not say that the dismissal was with prejudice or without prejudice.

Appeal and filing fees

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court certified that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied William Freeman permission to proceed on appeal without paying the required filing fees. The judgment cites Coppedge v. United States for the principle that good faith exists when an appellant seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue.

Effect of the judgment

The action is dismissed. The provided judgment does not identify the underlying claims or explain the reasons for dismissal beyond referring to the July 23 order.

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.