Nicholas J. Price v. YesCare

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK NICHOLAS J. PRICE, Plaintiff, 25-CV-3244 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL YESCARE, Defendant.

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at the Orange County Jail, filed this pro se complaint and an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (ECF 1, 2.)

Invoking 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants “falsified” his medical records and denied him adequate medical treatment. (Id.) Plaintiff previously submitted to this Court a similar but not identical complaint, Price v. YesCare, No. 25-CV-1024, 1 (LTS) (S.D.N.Y) (“Price I”), which asserts claims arising out of the same and related events. By order dated August 18, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint in Price I. (ECF 6.)

By order dated August 18, 2025, the Court directed Plaintiff to show cause why this complaint, which asserts claims that overlap with those set forth in Price I, should not be dismissed without prejudice to Price I. The Court noted in its order that no useful purpose would be served by litigating what appears to be a duplicative action, and that if Plaintiff proceeded with this second lawsuit, he would be required, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), to pay another filing fee. (ECF 5.) Plaintiff did not respond to the order to show cause or otherwise communicate with the Court.

Accordingly, the Court dismisses this complaint without prejudice to the continuing litigation proceeding in Price I, No. 25-CV-1024 (LTS). Plaintiff may, consistent with the order to amend issued in Price I, and Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, name all the defendants he seeks to hold liable in connection with the events giving rise to that matter, and assert all of his claims in one action.

The Court directs the Clerk of Court not to charge Plaintiff the $350.00 filing fee for this action, and the Warden or Superintendent having custody of Plaintiff shall not deduct or encumber funds from Plaintiff’s prison trust account for this lawsuit.

CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed in this order, the Court dismisses this complaint without prejudice to the continuing litigation in Price v. YesCare, No. 25-CV-1024 (LTS).

The Court directs the Clerk of Court not to charge Plaintiff the $350.00 filing fee for this 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 IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).

The Clerk of Court is further directed to enter judgment dismissing this case.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 27, 2025 New York, New York /s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge