Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 6, 2022

Gayden v. Sackler Family

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-05918
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Gayden v. Sackler Family, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction after Gayden failed to amend it as ordered.

Who this affects

John Matthew Gayden, Jr.; his complaint against Sackler Family was dismissed, and permission to proceed without paying the filing fee was denied for an appeal.

What happened

John Matthew Gayden, Jr. sued Sackler Family. The court had ordered him to file an amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal.

Gayden did not file an amended complaint. The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning it found no legal basis for the federal court to hear the matter.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Gayden permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Gayden v. Sackler Family · No. 1:22-cv-05918
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 6, 2022

Background

By an order dated August 1, 2022, the court directed John Matthew Gayden, Jr. to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order warned that failing to comply would result in dismissal. The opinion states that Gayden did not file an amended complaint.

Ruling

The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3). Subject-matter jurisdiction is the court's legal authority to hear a case. The complaint had been filed without requiring payment of the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

Appeal and Judgment

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment in the matter.

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.