Cole v. Empire City Casino/MGM
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-05540
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Sonia Cole v. Casino Security Servants/Staffs, Et Al.: Judge McMahon dismissed the amended complaint after Cole failed to file another required complaint.
Sonia Cole's amended complaint was dismissed, and any state-law claims she may have been asserting were not heard under supplemental jurisdiction. The order also denied her permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.
What happened
In Sonia Cole v. Casino Security Servants/Staffs, Et Al., the court had ordered Cole to file a second amended complaint within 30 days and warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal.
Cole did not file the required complaint. The court therefore dismissed the amended complaint under the federal statute governing screening of complaints filed without paying the filing fee, and declined to consider any state-law claims.
Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Cole permission to proceed without paying the appeal fee.
The detailed version
- Cole v. Empire City Casino/MGM · No. 1:19-cv-05540
- Colleen McMahon
- Nov. 13, 2019
Background
On October 11, 2019, the court ordered Sonia Cole to file a second amended complaint within 30 days. The order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal of the amended complaint. Cole did not file a second amended complaint.
Ruling
The court dismissed the amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). That provision concerns court screening of a complaint filed without payment of the filing fee. The opinion does not explain the underlying claims or decide their merits.
The court also declined under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, meaning authority to hear related state-law claims, over any state-law claims Cole might be asserting.
Appeal and service
The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Cole and record service on the docket. The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.