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

Rushing v. Polk County

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-03449
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Rushing v. Polk County, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice for violating a filing-leave order and denied the counsel request as moot.

Who this affects

Shaun Rushing’s new civil action was dismissed without prejudice, his request for the court to request free counsel was denied as moot, and fee-free status for an appeal was denied.

What happened

Rushing v. Polk County was a new civil action filed by Shaun Rushing without a lawyer, along with a request to proceed without paying filing fees.

The court had previously ordered that Rushing could not file a new civil action without first obtaining permission. Rushing did not seek that permission before filing this case.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Rushing failed to follow the earlier order. Judge Swain also denied Rushing’s request for the court to seek free legal counsel as moot and denied fee-free status for any appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rushing v. Polk County · No. 1:22-cv-03449
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 12, 2022

Background

Shaun Rushing filed this new civil action without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. On January 3, 2022, the court had ordered that Rushing could not file any new civil action in that court without first obtaining the court’s permission to file. Rushing had not requested that permission before filing this action.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action without prejudice because Rushing failed to comply with the January 3 order. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal itself does not bar a later filing, although the opinion states that Rushing must comply with the earlier filing requirement. The court also denied Rushing’s request for the court to request free legal counsel as moot. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

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.