Rogers v. The City of New Rochelle
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-00479
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Rogers v. City of New Rochelle, Chief Judge McMahon dismissed the action after Rogers failed to amend his complaint as ordered.
Darius Rogers's action against The Cityof New Rochelle and the other named defendants was dismissed.
What happened
In Darius Rogers v. The Cityof New Rochelle, et al., the court had previously allowed Rogers 60 days to file an amended complaint. The court warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal for failure to state a claim.
Rogers did not file an amended complaint within that period. The court therefore dismissed the action for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon also found that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Rogers permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Rogers v. The City of New Rochelle · No. 1:19-cv-00479
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 22, 2020
Background
By an order dated October 25, 2019, the court gave Darius Rogers 60 days to file an amended complaint. The order stated that failing to comply would result in dismissal for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Rogers did not file an amended complaint.
Ruling
The court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The order did not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail Rogers a copy of the order and record service on the docket. Judge Colleen McMahon also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Rogers permission to proceed without paying the required fees for an appeal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.