Alexander v. Department of Homeless Services
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-10187
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Alexander v. Department of Homeless Services, Judge Swain dismissed a duplicate complaint without prejudice to Alexander’s pending case.
Liam Alexander’s duplicate lawsuit was dismissed, while his pending related case under docket number 22-CV-10160 remained unaffected by this dismissal.
What happened
Liam Alexander, representing himself, sued the New York City Department of Homeless Services, alleging that it violated his rights. He had already filed a case against the department raising the same claims, and that case was still pending under docket number 22-CV-10160.
The court found that litigating the second complaint would serve no useful purpose because it duplicated the pending case. It dismissed this complaint without prejudice to Alexander’s pending case.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. She also denied Alexander permission to appeal without paying court fees, finding that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Alexander v. Department of Homeless Services · No. 1:22-cv-10187
- Laura Swain
- Dec. 6, 2022
Background
Liam Alexander, who was representing himself, brought this action against the New York City Department of Homeless Services (DHS), alleging that DHS violated his rights. The opinion does not describe the underlying alleged violations in detail.
Alexander had previously filed a duplicate complaint against DHS asserting the same claims. That earlier case remained pending under docket number 22-CV-10160 (LTS).
Ruling
The court dismissed Alexander’s complaint as duplicative because the same claims were already pending in the earlier case. The dismissal was without prejudice to Alexander’s pending case under docket number 22-CV-10160 (LTS).
Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.