Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 11, 2023

White v. Ezekwe

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:22-cv-04451
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Motion to DismissCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In White v. Ezekwe, Judge Halpern granted the motion to dismiss, dismissed the complaint with prejudice, and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, Frank W. White Jr., whose claims were dismissed with prejudice and whose permission to appeal without paying filing fees was denied; the defendant, Felix Ikeshukwu Ezekwe, whose motion to dismiss was granted.

What happened

In White v. Ezekwe, the defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint. Before the motion, the parties exchanged letters about alleged pleading deficiencies, and the plaintiff said he intended to stand on his complaint.

The court had expressly allowed the plaintiff to amend, but he chose not to do so. The court concluded that amendment would be futile and dismissed the claims with prejudice, meaning they could not be refiled in an amended complaint.

Judge Philip Halpern also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied the plaintiff permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The case was closed.

The detailed version

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

Case
White v. Ezekwe · No. 7:22-cv-04451
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Dec. 11, 2023

Background

The judgment states that the defendant filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint. Before the motion practice, the parties exchanged letters about deficiencies that the defendant identified in the pleading. The plaintiff advised the defendant that he intended to stand on his pleading.

Amendment

The court expressly gave the plaintiff an opportunity to amend the complaint, but he elected not to do so. The court stated that leave to amend was unnecessary because any amendment would be futile.

Ruling

The court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss. It dismissed the claims alleged in the complaint with prejudice because amendment would be futile. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the Opinion and Order would not be taken in good faith. As a result, it denied the plaintiff permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees, and the case was closed.

Scope of the provided text

The judgment refers to an Opinion and Order dated December 11, 2023, but that underlying opinion is not included here. The provided text therefore does not state the specific claims or substantive reasons supporting dismissal.

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.