Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 12, 2022

Ventura v. Jane Doe Officers

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:21-cv-11132
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Ventura v. AMKC Jane Doe Officers, Judge Swain dismissed Ventura’s complaint as time-barred and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

David Ventura’s complaint was dismissed, and his permission to appeal without prepaying the filing fee was denied. The opinion does not describe any separate relief affecting the defendant officers.

What happened

In Ventura v. AMKC Jane Doe Officers; AMKC John Doe Officers, the court had ordered David Ventura to explain why his lawsuit should not be dismissed as filed too late.

The court mailed that order to the Anna M. Kross Center, but it was returned after Ventura was discharged. Ventura did not respond, update his address, or otherwise communicate with the court.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim because it was time-barred. She also denied Ventura permission to appeal without paying filing fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ventura v. Jane Doe Officers · No. 1:21-cv-11132
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Apr. 12, 2022

Background

David Ventura brought this action against AMKC Jane Doe Officers and AMKC John Doe Officers. The complaint was filed without prepaying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

On February 2, 2022, the court ordered Ventura to show cause—meaning to explain—within 60 days why the action should not be dismissed as time-barred. The court warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal. The order was mailed to Ventura at the Anna M. Kross Center on Rikers Island, but it was returned as undeliverable on February 22, 2022, after Ventura had been discharged. New York City Department of Correction records confirmed that he was no longer in its custody. Ventura did not respond, update his address, or communicate with the court.

Ruling

The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted because the action was time-barred. The dismissal was made under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), which requires screening of qualifying complaints filed without prepaying the filing fee.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. She therefore denied Ventura permission to appeal without prepaying the appellate filing fee.

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.