Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 16, 2022

Ingram IV v. Cuomo

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:22-cv-05067
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

Ingram IV v. Queens County The City of New York: Judge Ramos directed that a miscellaneous case be opened as a civil action and administratively closed.

Who this affects

Wilbert Ingram IV and the Clerk of Court; the matter was directed to be opened as a new civil action and the miscellaneous case was administratively closed.

What happened

In Wilbert Ingram IV v. Queens County The City of New York, Wilbert Ingram IV filed a case without a lawyer as a purported miscellaneous matter. His complaint sought money damages and an order requiring action or preventing action.

The court determined that the complaint did not fit any listed category for a miscellaneous matter. The order did not address whether Ingram IV’s claims were legally valid.

Judge Ramos directed the Clerk of Court to open the matter as a new civil action, assign it to his docket, administratively close the miscellaneous case, and mail the order to Ingram IV.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ingram IV v. Cuomo · No. 1:22-cv-05067
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
June 16, 2022

Background

Wilbert Ingram IV filed the matter without a lawyer as a purported miscellaneous case. The complaint asserted claims for damages and injunctive relief.

Court’s action

The court concluded that the complaint did not fit any of the listed categories of miscellaneous matters. Rather than deciding the merits of the claims, the court directed the Clerk of Court to open the matter as a new civil action and assign it to Judge Ramos’s docket. The court also directed the clerk to administratively close the miscellaneous case and mail a copy of the order to Ingram IV.

Effect

The order changed how the matter was docketed; it did not state whether Ingram IV would prevail on his claims or dispose of those claims on their merits.

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.