Vickie M. Stringer v. Macmillan Publishers, LLC, et al.

S.D. New York

Vickie M. Stringer v. Macmillan Publishers, LLC, et al.

DecidedSeptember 3, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-06651

StatusUnknown

This text of Vickie M. Stringer v. Macmillan Publishers, LLC, et al. (Vickie M. Stringer v. Macmillan Publishers, LLC, et al.) 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

Vickie M. Stringer v. Macmillan Publishers, LLC, et al., (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK VICKIE M. STRINGER, Plaintiff, 1:25-CV-6651 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL MACMILLAN PUBLISHERS, LLC, et al., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: On August 26, 2025, Plaintiff, who appears pro se, filed a notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.1 (ECF 8.) Plaintiff seeks to discontinue her claims against Defendant Macmillan Publishers, LLC, and to proceed only with her claims against Defendant St. Martin’s Press. (Id.) The Court grants Plaintiff’s request. The Court dismisses Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Macmillan Publishers, LLC, without prejudice. The Court directs the Clerk of Court to terminate this defendant from this action under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.2

1 Because Plaintiff seems to reveal the full name of a minor child in her in forma pauperis application (ECF 2), the Court has directed the Clerk of Court to restrict electronic access to that court submission to a “case participant-only” basis. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a)(3) (references to a minor child’s name in a court submission must be in the form of the child’s name’s initials). 2 A voluntary dismissal under this rule is without prejudice. “But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal- or state-court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B). 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. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 3, 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 VICKIE M. STRINGER, Plaintiff, 1:25-CV-6651 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL MACMILLAN PUBLISHERS, LLC, et al., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: On August 26, 2025, Plaintiff, who appears pro se, filed a notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.1 (ECF 8.) Plaintiff seeks to discontinue her claims against Defendant Macmillan Publishers, LLC, and to proceed only with her claims against Defendant St. Martin’s Press. (Id.) The Court grants Plaintiff’s request. The Court dismisses Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Macmillan Publishers, LLC, without prejudice. The Court directs the Clerk of Court to terminate this defendant from this action under Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.2

1 Because Plaintiff seems to reveal the full name of a minor child in her in forma pauperis application (ECF 2), the Court has directed the Clerk of Court to restrict electronic access to that court submission to a “case participant-only” basis. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a)(3) (references to a minor child’s name in a court submission must be in the form of the child’s name’s initials). 2 A voluntary dismissal under this rule is without prejudice. “But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal- or state-court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B). 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. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 3, 2025 New York, New York

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Vickie M. Stringer v. Macmillan Publishers, LLC, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vickie-m-stringer-v-macmillan-publishers-llc-et-al-nysd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack