Batiste v. The City of New York
- Gregory Woods
- 1:22-cv-09772
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Batiste v. City of New York, Judge Woods dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees.
Darryll Batiste’s complaint was dismissed. The City of New York was the defendant, and the case was closed.
What happened
In Batiste v. The City of New York, the court had directed Batiste to file an amended complaint within 45 days. The court later extended the deadline to January 24, 2023, and Batiste filed an amended complaint.
The judgment says the court dismissed the complaint because it did not state a claim for which relief could be granted. The opinion does not explain what claims Batiste presented or why they were insufficient.
Judge Gregory Woods’s court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Batiste permission to appeal without paying court fees. The case was closed.
The detailed version
- Batiste v. The City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-09772
- Gregory Woods
- Feb. 2, 2023
Background
The court had ordered Batiste to file an amended complaint within 45 days and warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal. The court later granted Batiste’s request for more time and set January 24, 2023, as the filing deadline. Batiste filed an amended complaint. The judgment does not describe the allegations or legal claims in that complaint.
Ruling
The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The judgment does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice. It also states that the court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. As a result, the court denied permission to appeal without paying court fees, and the case was closed.
Effect
The dismissal ended this case in the district court. The judgment does not provide further explanation of the deficient claim or address the merits of any underlying factual allegations.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.