Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 17, 2024

Mercer v. New York City Police Dept. 47 Precint

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-02827
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Mercer v. New York City Police Dept – 47 Precinct, Judge Swain dismissed the duplicate lawsuit without prejudice.

Who this affects

Ira Mercer’s duplicate case was dismissed without prejudice; the separate case under docket number 24-CV-2803 remained pending. The named defendants were affected by the dismissal of this duplicative action.

What happened

In Mercer v. New York City Police Dept – 47 Precinct, Ira Mercer, representing himself, sued two New York City police officers, the Bronx County District Attorney, and a New York Family Court attorney-referee.

The court found that Mercer had already filed an identical case against the same defendants, which remained pending under docket number 24-CV-2803. It dismissed this duplicate case without prejudice to that pending case.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ended the other pending matters in this case, denied fee-free appeal status, and directed the clerk to enter judgment.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mercer v. New York City Police Dept. 47 Precint · No. 1:24-cv-02827
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Apr. 17, 2024

Background

Ira Mercer, who was proceeding without a lawyer, brought the action under the court’s federal-question jurisdiction. He named two New York City Police Department officers, the District Attorney for Bronx County, and a Court Attorney Referee for the Family Court of the State of New York as defendants.

Reason for Dismissal

The court stated that Mercer had previously filed an identical complaint asserting the same claims against the same defendants. That earlier case was pending under docket number 24-CV-2803. Because this action duplicated the pending case, the court concluded that litigating it would serve no useful purpose.

Ruling

The court dismissed this action without prejudice as duplicative of the case under docket number 24-CV-2803. The order did not decide the underlying claims. It also terminated all other pending matters in this action and directed the clerk to enter judgment.

The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and denied fee-free status for 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.