Endeley v. New York University
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-04889
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Judge Swain's Endeley v. New York University judgment bars future IFP civil filings against NYU without permission and closes the case.
Saint Jermaine Endeley is subject to a permission requirement for future fee-free civil actions against New York University in this court. New York University is the entity covered by that restriction. The case is closed, and Endeley was denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
In Saint Jermaine Endeley v. New York University, the court restricted Saint Jermaine Endeley's ability to bring future civil cases against New York University in this court without advance permission.
The restriction applies to cases filed without paying the filing fee. Endeley must submit the proposed complaint and a copy of the judgment with any request for permission. The judgment also warns that further meritless litigation could lead to a broader filing restriction.
Judge Swain's judgment closes the case and denies fee-free status for any appeal because the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The judgment does not decide the merits of any underlying claim.
The detailed version
- Endeley v. New York University · No. 1:25-cv-04889
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 28, 2025
Ruling
The court entered judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, a law that permits federal courts to issue orders needed to manage litigation. Based on the reasons stated in a separate Bar Order dated October 27, 2025, the court barred Saint Jermaine Endeley from filing future civil actions without paying the filing fee in this court against New York University unless he first obtains the court's permission.
To seek permission, Endeley must file a motion with the court's Pro Se Intake Unit and attach both the proposed complaint and a copy of the judgment. If he files an action against New York University without first filing a permission motion, the action will be dismissed for failure to comply with the judgment. The court also warned that further litigation lacking merit could result in a broader order requiring Endeley to obtain permission before filing fee-free complaints against any defendant.
Appeal and Case Status
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied fee-free status for an appeal. The case was closed. The reproduced judgment does not describe the underlying claims or decide their merits; it addresses filing restrictions and appeal status. The separate Bar Order on which the judgment relies is not included in the provided text.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.