You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
[Source Check] Doe v. Black — Locate the signed October 2026 dismissal order
#122
October 16 coverage and public defense statements describe a dismissal with prejudice after the plaintiff asked to withdraw. GAH separately reviewed the signed April 23, 2026 sanctions opinion (ECF 388). The court's earlier sanctions findings must not be conflated with a trial verdict on the alleged assault.
Requested public docket receipt
Find the signed October disposition and the related publicly releasable docket entry for SDNY No. 1:23-cv-06418, including exact entry number, filing date and procedural basis. If available, identify whether later filings alter the collateral sanctions or fee process.
Critical guardrails
Do not post any nonpublic medical/identifying information or attempt to unmask an anonymous litigant. The underlying assault allegation was not adjudicated by a merits jury verdict in the reported dismissal, and claims by either side should be attributed.
Open verification question: What does the signed October dismissal order actually say, and how precisely is it docketed?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Canonical GAH article
Doe v. Black: dismissal with prejudice, sanctions and no trial verdict.
Current published position
October 16 coverage and public defense statements describe a dismissal with prejudice after the plaintiff asked to withdraw. GAH separately reviewed the signed April 23, 2026 sanctions opinion (ECF 388). The court's earlier sanctions findings must not be conflated with a trial verdict on the alleged assault.
Requested public docket receipt
Find the signed October disposition and the related publicly releasable docket entry for SDNY No. 1:23-cv-06418, including exact entry number, filing date and procedural basis. If available, identify whether later filings alter the collateral sanctions or fee process.
Critical guardrails
Do not post any nonpublic medical/identifying information or attempt to unmask an anonymous litigant. The underlying assault allegation was not adjudicated by a merits jury verdict in the reported dismissal, and claims by either side should be attributed.
Open verification question: What does the signed October dismissal order actually say, and how precisely is it docketed?
All reactions