Latimore v. Dutchess County Sheriff Dept.
Latimore v. Dutchess County Sheriff Dept.
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SHANNON LATIMORE, Plaintiff, 24-CV-6654 (LTS) -against- DUTCHESS COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT., ET ORDER OF DISMISSAL AL., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated December 16, 2024, the Court directed Plaintiff to show cause within 30 days why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice because he did not update his address with the court, as directed in the court’s March 18, 2024 Standing Order. See In Re: Cases Filed By Pro Se Plaintiffs, This Matter Relates To: Duty of Self-Represented Parties to Keep Address Information Current, No. 24-MC-127 (LTS) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2024) (“Standing Order”). Plaintiff has not updated his address or otherwise communicated with the court. Accordingly, the Court dismisses this action without prejudice, under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the December 16, 2024 order and the March 18, 2024 Standing Order. This dismissal is without prejudice to Plaintiff’s filing a new civil action. The Court certifies, under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States,
369 U.S. 438, 444–45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). The Court directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment in this action. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 12, 2025 New York, New York
/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown