Panetta v. Cassel
- 7:20-cv-02255
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Panetta v. Cassel, the court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss and closed the case.
Sylvia Panetta, the defendants, and the unnamed John and Jane Doe defendants. Panetta’s first, second, fifth, sixth, and seventh claims and claims against the Doe defendants were dismissed with prejudice; her third and fourth state-law claims were dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
In Panetta v. Cassel, the court entered judgment for the defendants after granting their motions to dismiss.
The court dismissed Sylvia Panetta’s first, second, fifth, sixth, and seventh claims with prejudice. It dismissed her remaining state-law claims without prejudice and dismissed her claims against John and Jane Does 1–20 with prejudice.
The court also denied fee-free appeal status, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and closed the case. The judgment was entered on September 7, 2023, by the court.
The detailed version
- Panetta v. Cassel · No. 7:20-cv-02255
- Sept. 7, 2023
Ruling
The judgment states that, for the reasons given in the court’s Opinion and Order dated September 7, 2023, the defendants’ motions to dismiss were granted. A motion to dismiss asks the court to end claims at an early stage rather than proceed to further litigation.
Claims dismissed
The plaintiff’s first, second, fifth, sixth, and seventh claims for relief were dismissed with prejudice, meaning the judgment bars those claims from being brought again in the case. The plaintiff’s remaining state-law claims—the third and fourth claims for relief—were dismissed without prejudice, meaning the judgment did not bar refiling those claims on that basis. The plaintiff’s claims against John and Jane Does 1–20 were dismissed with prejudice.
Appeal and case status
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied the plaintiff’s status to appeal without prepaying filing fees. The case was closed. The judgment is signed by the clerk of court, and the opinion text provided does not identify the judge who issued the referenced Opinion and Order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.