Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 22, 2024

Varlack v. TransUnion

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-06760
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Varlack v. TransUnion, Judge Swain granted Varlack’s request to withdraw her claims and dismissed the complaint without prejudice.

Who this affects

Tynearia A. Varlack’s action against TransUnion, LLC, Experian, Equifax, and Discover Bank was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.

What happened

In Varlack v. TransUnion, Tynearia A. Varlack told the court that she wanted to withdraw her claims against all defendants. The defendants had not been served with the summons and complaint.

The court granted Varlack’s request and voluntarily dismissed the complaint without prejudice under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The opinion does not address the underlying claims.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, so Varlack was denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Varlack v. TransUnion · No. 1:23-cv-06760
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Feb. 22, 2024

Background

Tynearia A. Varlack sued TransUnion, LLC; Experian; Equifax; and Discover Bank. On February 21, 2024, she sent the court a letter stating that she wanted to withdraw her claims against all defendants. The defendants had not yet been served with the summons and complaint.

Ruling

The court granted Varlack’s request to withdraw the action. It voluntarily dismissed the complaint without prejudice under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A dismissal without prejudice does not bar the action from being brought again, although the opinion does not discuss any future filing.

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment. The opinion did not decide the merits of Varlack’s claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.