Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 17, 2022

Leon v. Town Board of the Town of Ramapo

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-03965
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Leon v. Town Board, Judge Swain dismissed Leon’s complaint for failing to file an ordered amended complaint and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

The dismissal ended Vladimir Leon’s complaint against the Town Board of the Town of Ramapo and the East Ramapo Schools District Board of Education. Leon was also denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee.

What happened

Leon v. Town Board of the Town of Ramapo involved a complaint that the court had ordered Leon to amend within 60 days. The order warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal, but Leon did not file an amended complaint.

The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim under the federal statute governing screening of complaints filed without paying filing fees. The opinion does not identify the claims in the original complaint or explain what amendments had been required.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied Leon permission to appeal without paying filing fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Leon v. Town Board of the Town of Ramapo · No. 1:22-cv-03965
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Oct. 17, 2022

Background

Vladimir Leon was the plaintiff, and the defendants were the Town Board of the Town of Ramapo and the East Ramapo Schools District Board of Education. The court had previously ordered Leon to file an amended complaint within 60 days. That order stated that the case would be dismissed if he did not comply. The opinion says that Leon did not file an amended complaint.

Ruling

The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). That provision requires the court to dismiss certain complaints filed without paying the filing fee when they fail to state a legally sufficient claim. The opinion does not describe the claims in Leon’s original complaint or the specific deficiencies identified in the earlier order.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Leon permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The clerk was directed to enter judgment. The opinion does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

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.