Nunez v. Silber

S.D. New York

Nunez v. Silber

DecidedJune 9, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-03879

StatusUnknown

This text of Nunez v. Silber (Nunez v. Silber) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nunez v. Silber, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JAVIER NUNEZ, Plaintiff, 1:25-CV-3879 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL MARK SILBER, UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Defendant. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: In an order dated October 31, 2023, the Court barred Plaintiff from filing future civil actions in this court in forma pauperis (“IFP”) “arising from [Plaintiff’s] eviction and the other, related events” without first obtaining the court’s leave to file. Nunez v. Silber, ECF 1:23-CV- 0625, 20, at 2 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2023), appeal dismissed as frivolous, No. 23-7763 (2d Cir. Mar. 20, 2024). Plaintiff, in his complaint for the present action, names Mark Silber as the defendant; Silber was named as a defendant in his previous litigation that was the basis for the abovementioned filing injunction. See Nunez, ECF 1:23-CV-0625, 17 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 24, 2023) (order recounting Plaintiff’s litigation history and directing Plaintiff to show cause why the abovementioned filing injunction should not be imposed by the Court). Plaintiff’s claims in his complaint for the present action also arise from his eviction and the related events. (ECF 1:25- CV-3879, 1, at 5.) Plaintiff has sought the Court’s leave to proceed IFP (ECF 4), but he has not sought the Court’s leave to file this action. Accordingly, the Court dismisses this action without prejudice because of Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s October 31, 2023 order in Nunez, ECF 1:23-CV-0625, 20. The Court certifies, pursuant to 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 Court directs the Clerk of Court to enter a judgment dismissing this action for the

reasons set forth in this order. SO ORDERED. Dated: June 6, 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 JAVIER NUNEZ, Plaintiff, 1:25-CV-3879 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL MARK SILBER, UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Defendant. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: In an order dated October 31, 2023, the Court barred Plaintiff from filing future civil actions in this court in forma pauperis (“IFP”) “arising from [Plaintiff’s] eviction and the other, related events” without first obtaining the court’s leave to file. Nunez v. Silber, ECF 1:23-CV- 0625, 20, at 2 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2023), appeal dismissed as frivolous, No. 23-7763 (2d Cir. Mar. 20, 2024). Plaintiff, in his complaint for the present action, names Mark Silber as the defendant; Silber was named as a defendant in his previous litigation that was the basis for the abovementioned filing injunction. See Nunez, ECF 1:23-CV-0625, 17 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 24, 2023) (order recounting Plaintiff’s litigation history and directing Plaintiff to show cause why the abovementioned filing injunction should not be imposed by the Court). Plaintiff’s claims in his complaint for the present action also arise from his eviction and the related events. (ECF 1:25- CV-3879, 1, at 5.) Plaintiff has sought the Court’s leave to proceed IFP (ECF 4), but he has not sought the Court’s leave to file this action. Accordingly, the Court dismisses this action without prejudice because of Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s October 31, 2023 order in Nunez, ECF 1:23-CV-0625, 20. The Court certifies, pursuant to 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 Court directs the Clerk of Court to enter a judgment dismissing this action for the

reasons set forth in this order. SO ORDERED. Dated: June 6, 2025 New York, New York

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Nunez v. Silber, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nunez-v-silber-nysd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack