The Estate of William Scales v. ATU Local 1181
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-09009
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In The Estate of William Scales v. ATU Local 1181, Judge Swain dismissed the complaint after William Scales failed to file the required amendment.
William Scales, whom the court treated as the sole plaintiff, and ATU Local 1181.
What happened
The case is The Estate of William Scales v. ATU Local 1181. Although the complaint named the estate as plaintiff, it was signed by William Scales, and the court treated him as the sole plaintiff.
The court had ordered the plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failing to do so would lead to dismissal. No amended complaint was filed, so the court dismissed the complaint for failing to state a claim. It also declined to hear any state-law claims the plaintiff might have been asserting.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. She also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- The Estate of William Scales v. ATU Local 1181 · No. 1:23-cv-09009
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 15, 2024
Background
The complaint listed “The Estate of William Scales” as the plaintiff, but William Scales signed it. The court stated that it was clear Scales filed the complaint on his own behalf and therefore treated him as the sole plaintiff in the action.
The complaint was filed under the federal statute allowing a person to proceed without prepaying filing fees, known as proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP). In an order dated January 2, 2024, the court directed the plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 60 days and warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal.
Ruling
The plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. The court therefore dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The opinion does not describe the underlying claims in detail.
The court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims the plaintiff might have been asserting, citing 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment.
Appeal Status
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.