Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 6, 2021

Atadzhanov v. The New York City

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:21-cv-02911
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Atadzhanov v. The New York City, Judge McMahon granted voluntary dismissal because religious services resumed and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

Mirzo Atadzhanov’s action was closed at his request. The order prevented collection of the $350 filing fee and suspended any previously authorized deductions from his prison trust account for the lawsuit; it also denied fee-free status for an appeal.

What happened

In Atadzhanov v. The New York City, Mirzo Atadzhanov asked the court to close his case because officials at Rikers Island had resumed religious services and his requested relief was therefore no longer needed.

The court granted his request and voluntarily dismissed the action under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The order closed the case, directed that Atadzhanov not be charged the $350 filing fee, and directed suspension of any previously authorized deductions from his prison trust account for this lawsuit.

Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for any appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Atadzhanov v. The New York City · No. 1:21-cv-02911
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
July 6, 2021

Background

On July 2, 2021, the court received a letter from Mirzo Atadzhanov requesting that the action be closed. He stated that officials at Rikers Island had resumed religious services as of June 18, 2021, so his requested relief was moot—that is, no longer a live matter requiring a court decision.

Disposition

The court granted Atadzhanov’s request. It stated that the action was withdrawn and voluntarily dismissed under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The order closed the case.

Fees and appeal

The Clerk of Court was directed not to charge Atadzhanov the $350 filing fee for the action. The warden or superintendent having custody of Atadzhanov was directed to suspend any previously authorized monetary deduction from his prison trust account for this lawsuit.

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The opinion does not address the underlying merits of the dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.