Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 20, 2022

Ross v. Harrell

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-01386
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Ross v. Harrell, Judge Swain dismissed Darnell Ross’s complaint without prejudice after he failed to follow filing instructions and update his mailing address.

Who this affects

Darnell Ross and the seven other individuals listed as plaintiffs were affected by the dismissal; Ross was also denied permission to proceed without paying the fee for an appeal.

What happened

In Ross v. Harrell, the court had directed Darnell Ross to pay the required filing fee or submit a completed request to proceed without paying it. The court also required him to resubmit the complaint’s signature page.

The court’s order was returned as undeliverable to the address Ross had provided. Ross did not notify the court of a new address or make further contact, so the court dismissed his complaint without prejudice. A footnote also states that the seven other individuals listed as plaintiffs were dismissed.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Ross permission to proceed without paying the appeal fee.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ross v. Harrell · No. 1:22-cv-01386
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Apr. 20, 2022

Background

The court had previously directed Plaintiff Darnell Ross, within 30 days, either to pay the $400 filing fee required to bring a civil action or to submit a completed application to proceed without paying the fee. The court also directed Ross to resubmit the complaint’s signature page.

Court’s Ruling

The prior order was returned to the court as undeliverable at the mailing address Ross had provided. The court stated that Ross had not complied with the prior order, had not notified the court of a change of address, and had not made further contact with the court. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice. A footnote states that the court also dismissed the seven individuals listed in the complaint as plaintiffs.

The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for purposes of an appeal.

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.