Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Sept. 11, 2025

In re: Drew Smith

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-09776
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Summary JudgmentCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In re: Drew Smith: Judge Swain denied Drew Smith’s summary-judgment motion as premature while screening his fee-free action.

Who this affects

Drew Smith, who filed the motion; the opposing party had not yet been served.

What happened

In In re: Drew Smith, Drew Smith, representing himself and proceeding without paying the filing fee, asked for summary judgment. The court said the action first had to undergo required screening before the opposing party could be served.

Because screening and service had not yet occurred, the court found the motion premature and denied it without prejudice. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion, and Smith may file another summary-judgment motion if the action proceeds after screening and service.

Judge Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for any appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
In re: Drew Smith · No. 1:24-cv-09776
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Sept. 11, 2025

Background

Drew Smith, who represented himself and proceeded without paying the filing fee, filed a motion for summary judgment. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or identify the opposing party.

Court’s Analysis

Because Smith was proceeding without paying the filing fee, the action was subject to screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. That statute requires the court to review such civil actions before summonses are issued and determine whether the action must be dismissed as frivolous or malicious, for failure to state a claim, or because it seeks monetary relief from an immune defendant.

The court explained that Smith could not properly seek summary judgment before the opposing party had been served with a summons and the initial pleading. Screening and service had not yet occurred, so the court found the motion premature and inappropriate to decide at that stage.

Ruling

The court denied Smith’s motion for summary judgment without prejudice to filing another such motion if the action proceeds after the required screening and service. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF 4. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.