Antrobus v. New York City

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided April 25, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-08822·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANDRE ANTROBUS, Plaintiff, 22-CV-8822 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL NEW YORK CITY, et al., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff filed this action while he was detained at Mid-Hudson Forensic Psychiatric Center. By order dated March 14, 2023, the Court directed Plaintiff, within 30 days, to submit a signature page for the complaint with an original signature. That order specified that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the complaint. On April 5, 2023, the order was returned to the Court with a notation on the envelope indicating that the mail was not deliverable because Plaintiff was no longer held at that facility. Plaintiff has not complied with the Court’s order and has failed to notify the Court of a change of mailing address. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice. All other pending matters in this case are terminated. 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 Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case. SO ORDERED. Dated: April 25, 2023 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Antrobus v. New York City, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Antrobus v. New York City (Antrobus v. New York City) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)