Morales v. The Whole Entire New York Police Department

S.D. New York

Morales v. The Whole Entire New York Police Department

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 10, 2025·No. 1:24-cv-04778·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELIAS MORALES; ENKI RODRIGUEZ/MORALES, Plaintiffs, 24-CV-4778 (LTS) -against- ORDER THE WHOLE ENTIRE NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT, ET AL., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this action pro se and in forma pauperis.1 By order dated October 25, 2024, and entered on the court’s docket on October 30, 2024, 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)(i), but granted Plaintiff 30 days’ leave to replead his claims in an amended complaint. (ECF 5.) That order specified that if Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint within the prescribed time, the Court would direct the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.2 The Court therefore directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment dismissing this action for the reasons stated in the October 25, 2024 order of dismissal. (ECF 5.) 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

1 As discussed in the Court’s order of dismissal (ECF 5), the Court understands Elias Morales and “Enki Rodriguez/Morales” to be the same person. (See ECF 5, at 1 n.1.) 2 On October 25, 2025, the same date the Court signed the order of dismissal and five days before that order was entered on the court’s docket, the Court received from Plaintiff a 27- page letter that is similar in style to the complaint. (ECF 6.) Nothing in Plaintiff’s letter cures the deficiencies identified in the Court’s order of dismissal. 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). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 10, 2025 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELIAS MORALES; ENKI RODRIGUEZ/MORALES, Plaintiffs, 24-CV-4778 (LTS) -against- ORDER THE WHOLE ENTIRE NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT, ET AL., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this action pro se and in forma pauperis.1 By order dated October 25, 2024, and entered on the court’s docket on October 30, 2024, 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)(i), but granted Plaintiff 30 days’ leave to replead his claims in an amended complaint. (ECF 5.) That order specified that if Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint within the prescribed time, the Court would direct the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.2 The Court therefore directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment dismissing this action for the reasons stated in the October 25, 2024 order of dismissal. (ECF 5.) 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

1 As discussed in the Court’s order of dismissal (ECF 5), the Court understands Elias Morales and “Enki Rodriguez/Morales” to be the same person. (See ECF 5, at 1 n.1.) 2 On October 25, 2025, the same date the Court signed the order of dismissal and five days before that order was entered on the court’s docket, the Court received from Plaintiff a 27- page letter that is similar in style to the complaint. (ECF 6.) Nothing in Plaintiff’s letter cures the deficiencies identified in the Court’s order of dismissal. 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). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 10, 2025 New York, New York

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

Morales v. The Whole Entire New York Police Department, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

Morales v. The Whole Entire New York Police Department (Morales v. The Whole Entire New York Police Department) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related