Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 29, 2024

Estrada v. Eric M. Taylor Center Warden

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-11321
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Estrada v. Rikers Island, Chief Judge Swain dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim after Estrada did not file the required amended complaint.

Who this affects

Elijah David Estrada’s action against Rikers Island, New York City, Eric M. Taylor Center Warden, and Department of Corrections was dismissed; fee-related status was denied for purposes of an appeal.

What happened

In Elijah David Estrada v. Rikers Island, New York City, Eric M. Taylor Center Warden, and Department of Corrections, the court had ordered Estrada to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal.

Estrada did not file an amended complaint. The court therefore dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. The complaint had been filed under a status allowing Estrada to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance.

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied that fee status for purposes of 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
Estrada v. Eric M. Taylor Center Warden · No. 1:23-cv-11321
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Apr. 29, 2024

Background

On January 29, 2024, the court directed Elijah David Estrada to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The order stated that failing to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint. Estrada did not file an amended complaint.

Ruling

The court 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 complaint had been filed under a status allowing Estrada to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Appeal and Judgment

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 the fee-related status for purposes of an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment in the action.

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.