Kilpatrick v. Hochul
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-06672
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Kilpatrick v. Hochul, Judge Swain ordered $405 returned because the case was closed and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
Gregory D. Kilpatrick’s $405 payment was ordered returned. The Finance Department was directed to return that payment and any future payments submitted for this closed case. Kilpatrick would need to file a new civil action and include payment to pursue the relief in his complaint.
What happened
In Gregory D. Kilpatrick v. Kathy Hochul, et al., the court had already dismissed Kilpatrick’s action, and the Clerk of Court had entered a civil judgment.
Kilpatrick repeatedly sent checks totaling $405 for the closed case. The court directed its Finance Department to return the latest payment and instructed it to return any future payments for this case.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the $405 returned, stated that the case was closed, and said Kilpatrick would need to file a new case and include payment to pursue the relief in his complaint. She also denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Kilpatrick v. Hochul · No. 1:25-cv-06672
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 23, 2025
Background
The opinion states that, by an August 21, 2025 order, the Court dismissed Gregory D. Kilpatrick’s action. It also states that Kilpatrick is barred from filing a new action without paying the filing fee unless he first obtains permission from the court to proceed without paying it. The Clerk of Court entered a civil judgment on August 22, 2025.
Payments
The Finance Department received two checks from Kilpatrick totaling $405 on August 28, 2025. Because the action was closed, the Court ordered those checks returned. The Court later received and returned additional payments totaling $405. On October 22, 2025, the Finance Department received another $405 check from Kilpatrick for the closed case.
Ruling
The Court directed the Finance Department to return the $405 payment received on October 22, 2025. It stated that the case was closed and ordered that any future payments submitted for this case also be returned. The Court further stated that, if Kilpatrick wanted to pursue the relief asserted in his complaint, he would have to file a new civil action and include payment with that new filing.
The Court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.