District Court, S.D. New York, 2024

Felicie v. Hill

Felicie v. Hill
District Court, S.D. New York · Decided December 8, 2024
Felicie v. Hill

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK BOBBY FELICIE, Plaintiff, -against- OCTAVIA HILL, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR 24-CV-7447 (LTS) GENERAL OF DOI; DETECTIVE WHITE; JUDGE DORIS GONZALEZ; JUDGE ORDER JOSEPH CAPELLA; GLADYS MALDONADO, CHIEF CLERK OF BRONX COUNTY; GLADYS AQUINO; CHELSEA JOHN; LETITIA JAMES; STEVEN BANKS, Defendants.

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed an unsigned order to show cause requesting preliminary injunctive relief. To obtain such relief, Plaintiff must show: (1) that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm and (2) either (a) a likelihood of success on the merits of his case or (b) sufficiently serious questions going to the merits to make them a fair ground for litigation and a balance of hardships tipping decidedly in his favor. See UBS Fin. Servs., Inc. v. W.V. Univ. Hosps., Inc., 660 F.3d 643, 648 (2d Cir. 2011) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); Wright v. Giuliani, 230 F.3d 543, 547 (2000). Preliminary injunctive relief “is an extraordinary and drastic remedy, one that should not be granted unless the movant, by a clear showing, carries the burden of persuasion.” Moore v. Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc., 409 F.3d 506, 510 (2d Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Plaintiff’s submissions do not demonstrate: (1) a likelihood of success on the merits, or (2) sufficiently serious questions going to the merits to make them a fair ground for litigation and a balance of hardships tipping decidedly in his favor. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request for an order to show cause (ECF No. 3) is denied. The Court will issue an explanatory order at a later date.

CONCLUSION Plaintiff’s request for an order to show cause (ECF No. 3) is denied.

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).

SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 6, 2024 New York, New York /s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.