Perry v. Maloney
- Laura Swain
- 1:21-cv-08039
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Perry v. Maloney, Judge Swain dismissed Ronald Perry’s complaint without prejudice after he failed to file an amended complaint.
Ronald Perry’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and his permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal was denied. The opinion does not identify the underlying claims.
What happened
In Perry v. Maloney, the court had ordered Ronald Perry to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal.
Perry did not file an amended complaint. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failing to follow the court’s order. The court also denied Perry’s request to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered the order on April 11, 2022. The dismissal was based on Perry’s failure to follow the court’s order, not on a decision about the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Perry v. Maloney · No. 1:21-cv-08039
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 11, 2022
Background
The court had directed Ronald Perry, by an order dated December 27, 2021, to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order stated that the complaint would be dismissed if he did not comply. The opinion says that Perry did not file an amended complaint.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply with the court’s order. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal itself does not bar refiling, although the opinion does not discuss any requirements or limitations that might apply to a later filing.
The complaint had been filed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The court did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.