Hernandez v. Oswinksi
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:18-cv-07365
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Hernandez v. Oswinski, Judge Briccetti entered judgment for defendants after Hernandez failed to amend his complaint or request more time.
Luis A. Hernandez’s claims were dismissed, judgment was entered for W. Oswinski, C.O. Faizon, and K. Lasik, and Hernandez was denied permission to proceed without paying court fees on appeal.
What happened
In Hernandez v. Oswinski, the court said Luis A. Hernandez had not filed an amended complaint or asked for more time by the deadline.
The court stated that it had already dismissed all of Hernandez’s claims. The judgment therefore favored W. Oswinski, C.O. Faizon, and K. Lasik, and the case was closed.
Judge Vincent Briccetti’s court also certified that an appeal from the earlier order would not be taken in good faith and denied Hernandez permission to proceed without paying court fees on appeal.
The detailed version
- Hernandez v. Oswinksi · No. 7:18-cv-07365
- Vincent Briccetti
- Nov. 27, 2019
Background
The judgment states that the court had previously dismissed all of Luis A. Hernandez’s claims in an order dated November 25, 2019. Hernandez then failed to file an amended complaint or request an extension of time.
Ruling
The court entered judgment in favor of W. Oswinski, C.O. Faizon, and K. Lasik and closed the case. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the November 25 order would not be taken in good faith, so Hernandez was denied permission to proceed without paying court fees for an appeal.
What the Judgment Does Not Say
The judgment does not describe the underlying claims, explain why they were dismissed, or state whether the earlier dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.