Ruddock v. Westchester Community College
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-05888
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ruddock v. Westchester Community College, Judge McMahon dismissed the action after Ruddock failed to amend his complaint as ordered.
The dismissal ended O’Kang Fenyang Andre Ruddock’s action against Westchester Community College, and he was denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Ruddock v. Westchester Community College, the court had previously allowed O’Kang Fenyang Andre Ruddock 60 days to file an amended complaint.
The court’s earlier order warned that failing to amend would lead to dismissal for failing to state a claim for which relief could be granted. Ruddock did not file an amended complaint.
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the action for failure to state a claim. She also denied Ruddock permission to appeal without paying filing fees, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Ruddock v. Westchester Community College · No. 1:19-cv-05888
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 21, 2020
Background
By an order dated November 6, 2019, the court gave Plaintiff 60 days to file an amended complaint. That order stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint.
Ruling
The court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The order does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice. The Clerk was directed to note service on the docket. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Plaintiff permission to appeal without paying the required fees.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.