Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 27, 2022

Hurt v. N.R.A. and its affiliates

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-04356
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Hurt v. N.R.A., Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice because Hurt did not obtain required permission to proceed without fees.

Who this affects

Tyrone Hurt's action against N.R.A. and its affiliates was dismissed without prejudice; the court also denied permission to proceed without fees for an appeal.

What happened

Tyrone Hurt filed this action without a lawyer and did not pay the filing fees or submit a request to proceed without paying them. The court therefore treated the filing as a request to proceed without fees.

The court said Hurt had previously been barred from filing a new action without paying fees unless he first obtained permission from the court. Because Hurt had not sought that permission, the court dismissed this action without prejudice for violating the earlier order.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Hurt permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hurt v. N.R.A. and its affiliates · No. 1:22-cv-04356
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 27, 2022

Background

Tyrone Hurt brought the action without a lawyer. He neither paid the filing fees nor filed a request to proceed without paying them. The court therefore assumed that he was seeking permission to proceed without fees.

The opinion states that, in an earlier proceeding, Hurt had been barred from filing any new action without paying fees unless he first obtained permission from the court. The earlier order was dated October 11, 2013.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action without prejudice because Hurt had not sought the permission required by the earlier order. The dismissal was based on his failure to comply with that order, not on a decision about the underlying claims against N.R.A. and its affiliates.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without fees for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.