Woodhouse v. Neiman-Marcus White Plains New York
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-06499
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Darri D. Woodhouse v. Neiman-Marcus White Plains New York, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice after required original signatures were not submitted.
Darri D. Woodhouse's action was dismissed without prejudice for failing to submit the required original signatures. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal. The opinion does not decide the claims against the defendants.
What happened
In Darri D. Woodhouse v. Neiman-Marcus White Plains New York, the court dismissed the action because the plaintiff did not provide required original signatures.
An earlier order gave Darri D. Woodhouse 30 days to resubmit signed pages for the complaint, the application to proceed without paying filing fees, and the prisoner authorization. The opinion says he did not submit those signed pages.
The court dismissed the action without prejudice and directed the clerk to enter judgment. Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain also found that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Woodhouse v. Neiman-Marcus White Plains New York · No. 1:25-cv-06499
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 23, 2025
Background
The court had previously ordered Darri D. Woodhouse to resubmit, within 30 days, the signature pages for his complaint, his application to proceed without paying filing fees, and his prisoner authorization. The earlier order required original signatures and warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal.
Ruling
The court found that Darri D. Woodhouse had not submitted the signed signature pages. Citing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a), it dismissed the action without prejudice. This order did not decide the underlying claims.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied fee-free status for the purpose of an appeal. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment dismissing the action for the reason stated in the order.
Effect
The action was dismissed without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar refiling based on the dismissal itself. The order separately denied the plaintiff fee-free status for an appeal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.