Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 16, 2024

Nunez v. Fraser

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-10750
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Nunez v. Fraser, Judge Swain dismissed the action without prejudice for violating a prior filing restriction and denied related requests.

Who this affects

Javier Nunez, whose action was dismissed without prejudice and whose requests for immediate injunctive relief and service through the United States Marshals Service were denied as moot; the defendants were not required to respond in this action.

What happened

Javier Nunez filed this action without a lawyer, seeking to proceed without paying the filing fee. His claims concerned an alleged eviction and related events covered by a prior court order.

That earlier order required Nunez to obtain permission before filing future fee-free civil actions about those events. Because he did not seek permission, the court dismissed this action without prejudice. The court also denied as moot his requests for immediate injunctive relief and for service by the United States Marshals Service.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment dismissing the action. She also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Nunez v. Fraser · No. 1:23-cv-10750
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 16, 2024

Background

Javier Nunez filed this action without a lawyer and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. His amended complaint was the operative pleading. It asserted claims arising from an alleged eviction and other related events, including matters covered in a prior related proceeding.

In an order dated October 31, 2023, the court had barred Nunez from filing future civil actions in that court without paying the filing fee concerning the alleged eviction and related events unless he first obtained permission from the court. The earlier order referred to people involved in the alleged eviction, a caseworker, therapists, and police officers who allegedly did not investigate complaints about those events.

Nunez did not seek permission before filing this action. He also requested immediate injunctive relief through an order to show cause for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order, but he did not specify the immediate relief sought. In addition, he asked the court to direct service on the defendants through the United States Marshals Service.

Ruling

The court dismissed this action without prejudice because Nunez failed to comply with the October 31, 2023 order. The court denied Nunez’s request for immediate injunctive relief as moot and denied his request for service through the United States Marshals Service as moot.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment dismissing the action. The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status 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.