Grant v. Thomas
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-04800
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Grant v. Thomas was dismissed, and Judge Swain certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Edwin Grant’s action against C.O. Thomas, Body Camera #9, and the other named defendants was dismissed.
What happened
In Edwin Grant v. C.O. Thomas, Body Camera #9, et al., the court entered a civil judgment dismissing the action. The opinion does not describe the claims or the events underlying the case.
The court said the dismissal was for the reasons stated in its November 13, 2025, order. That earlier order is not included here, so the reason for dismissal cannot be determined from this opinion.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. The action was dismissed, but the opinion does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Grant v. Thomas · No. 1:25-cv-04800
- Laura Swain
- Nov. 20, 2025
Disposition
The court entered a civil judgment dismissing Edwin Grant’s action against C.O. Thomas, Body Camera #9, and the other named defendants. The judgment states that the dismissal was based on the reasons given in the court’s November 13, 2025, order, which is not included in the provided opinion.
Appeal Certification
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court certified that any appeal from the judgment would not be taken in good faith. The court cited a Supreme Court decision explaining that an appeal is taken in good faith when the appellant seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue.
What the Opinion Does Not Say
The provided judgment does not identify the claims, explain the basis for dismissal, or state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.