Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 3, 2025

Alexandra Marie Dean v. Donald Trump, et al.

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-05743
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Dean v. Trump, Judge Swain dismissed the action and denied Alexandra Marie Dean permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

Who this affects

Alexandra Marie Dean's action was dismissed. The judgment also denied her permission to appeal without prepaying court fees; the judgment names Donald Trump and other defendants.

What happened

Alexandra Marie Dean sued Donald Trump and other defendants in Dean v. Trump. The court dismissed the action.

The judgment does not explain why the action was dismissed; it refers to a September 3, 2025, order whose text is not provided here. The court also stated that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered the judgment on September 3, 2025.

The detailed version

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

Case
Alexandra Marie Dean v. Donald Trump, et al. · No. 1:25-cv-05743
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Sept. 3, 2025

Disposition

The court dismissed the action. The civil judgment states that the reasons appeared in a separate September 3, 2025, order, but that order is not included in the provided text. Therefore, the basis for dismissal cannot be determined from this judgment alone.

Appeal Status

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 Alexandra Marie Dean permission to appeal without prepaying court fees. The judgment cited Coppedge v. United States for the principle that good faith exists when an appellant seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue.

Judge

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed and entered the judgment on September 3, 2025.

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.