Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 1, 2024

Hafner v. Hochul

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-00183
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hafner v. Hochul, Judge Swain dismissed Eric Hafner’s complaint without prejudice for not submitting required filing materials or paying fees.

Who this affects

Eric Hafner’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice because he did not submit the required prisoner authorization or pay the filing fees. The court also denied fee-free status for an appeal.

What happened

In Hafner v. Hochul, the court had ordered Eric Hafner to submit a completed prisoner authorization or pay the $405 filing fees within 30 days. The order warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal.

Hafner submitted another request to proceed without paying the filing fees, but he did not submit the required authorization or pay the fees. The court therefore dismissed the complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied fee-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hafner v. Hochul · No. 1:24-cv-00183
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Mar. 1, 2024

Background

The court had previously ordered Eric Hafner to submit a completed prisoner authorization or pay the $405 in filing fees required for a civil action. The January 22, 2024 order gave him 30 days to comply and warned that the complaint would be dismissed if he did not.

Hafner submitted a second application to proceed without paying the filing fees. He did not submit the required prisoner authorization or pay the fees.

Ruling

The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914 and 1915. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment. The order did not address the merits of Hafner’s claims.

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.