Ghouneim v. New York City Department of Homeless Services
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-04862
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ghouneim v. New York City Department of Homeless Services, Judge McMahon dismissed the action after no amended complaint was filed and denied appeal fee waiver.
Debbie Ghouneim's action against the New York City Department of Homeless Services was dismissed, and she was denied permission to proceed without paying appeal filing costs.
What happened
Debbie Ghouneim sued the New York City Department of Homeless Services. The court had previously given her 60 days to file an amended complaint after warning that failing to do so could end the case.
Ghouneim did not file an amended complaint within that period. The court therefore dismissed the action for failure to state a claim for which relief could be granted.
Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Ghouneim permission to proceed without paying the appeal filing costs.
The detailed version
- Ghouneim v. New York City Department of Homeless Services · No. 1:19-cv-04862
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 28, 2020
Background
Debbie Ghouneim brought this action against the New York City Department of Homeless Services. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
Prior Order and Failure to Amend
On November 13, 2019, the court granted Ghouneim permission to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. Ghouneim 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). This is a threshold ruling that ends the case without deciding the underlying claims. Judge Colleen McMahon also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying the filing costs for an appeal. The clerk was directed to note service on the docket.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.