Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Mar. 15, 2021

Bolling v. City of New York

Judge
Paul Gardephe
Docket
1:18-cv-05406
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Summary JudgmentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Bolling v. City of New York, Judge Gardephe overruled Bolling’s objection, adopted the recommendation, granted defendants’ summary-judgment motion, and closed the case.

Who this affects

Thomas Bolling’s case was resolved against him when the court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and closed the case. The court also denied fee-free appeal status for any appeal.

What happened

In Bolling v. City of New York, Thomas Bolling objected to a recommendation concerning the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

The court overruled Bolling’s objection, adopted the recommendation in full, and granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The case was closed. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal after certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

Judge Paul Gardephe issued the underlying order dated March 15, 2021, for the reasons stated there. The judgment itself does not explain the facts or the court’s reasoning.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Bolling v. City of New York · No. 1:18-cv-05406
Judge
Paul Gardephe
Date
Mar. 15, 2021

Background

Thomas Bolling sued the City of New York, the New York City Police Department, EMS, Detective Shannon Meyers, and Police Officer Peter Crane. The judgment states that Bolling filed an objection to a report and recommendation concerning the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The opinion text provided here does not describe the claims, underlying events, or arguments.

Ruling

The court overruled Bolling’s objection, adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety, and granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment is a decision resolving claims without a trial when the court determines that the case should be decided on the record before it. The court ordered that the case be closed.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Bolling permission to proceed without paying the required fees for purposes of an appeal.

Basis and Limits of This Summary

The judgment says that these rulings were made for the reasons stated in the court’s March 15, 2021 order, but that order is not included in the provided text. Therefore, the judgment alone does not reveal the court’s substantive reasoning or the specific basis for granting summary judgment.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.