Yarbrough v. Broome County, New York et al
| Sara-Judith: Yarbrough |
| Broome County, New York, Town of Barker, New York, Jason T. Garnar, Michael T. Decker, Robert G. Behnke, Joseph A. Mihalko, Joseph F. Cawley, Edward Beecher, Frederick J. Akshar, Daniel J. Reynolds, Mark R. Whalen, Stephen J. Flagg, Scott D. Baker, Kelly F. Wildoner, Kim A. Myers, Greg W. Bladwin, Matthew J. Pasquale, Jason E. Shaw, Louis P. Augostini, Robert Weslar, Mary A. Kaminsky, Mel Manasse & Son, Robert Voorhis, Judy Osborn, Matthew J. Hilerbrant, Erin V. Micha and Susan Ryan |
| 3:2023cv00671 |
| June 6, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Miroslav Lovric |
| Anne M Nardacci |
| Personal Property: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 9, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 TEXT ORDER: On June 7, 2023, the Court issued a Text Order denying without prejudice to refiling, Plaintiff's Complaint and Request for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, Dkt. No. #1 , because such filing did not comport with the Local Rules. Dkt. No. 5 . On June 7, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Letter, Dkt. No. #6 , and on June 8, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order Without Notice, Dkt. No. #7 . The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's Letter, Dkt. No. #6 , and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order Without Notice, Dkt. No. #7 , and finds that such filings do not comport with the Local Rules for the same reasons set forth in Dkt. No. 5 . In addition, Plaintiff has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of her claim. Here, Plaintiff appears to be seeking injunctive relief from a state eviction proceeding. See Dkt. Nos. #1 & #7 . However, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over such an action. See Oliver v. N.Y. City Hous. Auth., No. 10-CV-3204, 2011 WL 839110, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2011) ("[F]ederal courts do not have subject matter jurisdiction over state eviction actions or other landlord-tenant matters"). Moreover, under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, this Court does not have jurisdiction to provide Plaintiff with the relief sought. See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923). The Rooker-Feldman doctrine "stands for the proposition that lower federal courts possess no power...to sit in direct review of state court decisions." Swiatkowski v. Citibank, 745 F. Supp. 2d 150, 163 (E.D.N.Y. 2010), aff'd, 446 F. App'x 360 (2d Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted); See Hoblock v. Albany Cty. Bd. of Elections, 422 F.3d 77, 84 (2d Cir. 2005) ("[F]ederal district courts lack jurisdiction over suits that are, in substance, appeals from state-court judgments."). Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order Without Notice, Dkt. No. #7 , is DENIED without prejudice to refiling. SO ORDERED by U.S. District Judge Anne M. Nardacci on 6/9/2023. (Copy served upon pro se plaintiff by regular mail). (mab) |
| Filing 8 EXHIBITS to #7 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Sara-Judith: Yarbrough. (ztc) |
| Filing 7 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order Without Notice filed by Sara-Judith: Yarbrough.(ztc) |
| Filing 6 Letter from Sara-Judith: Yarbrough. (ztc) |
| Filing 5 TEXT ORDER: The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's Complaint with request for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. Dkt. No. #1 . The Local Rules require a moving party to either move in accordance with "the standard motion procedure (i.e., advanced notice, 21 days for an opposition, and 7 days for a reply)" or the movant must include "an affidavit clearly and specifically showing good and sufficient cause why the standard motion procedure cannot be used," and require that the moving party "give reasonable advanced notice of the application for an Order to Show Cause to the other parties, except in those circumstances where the movant demonstrates, in a detailed and specific affidavit, good cause why reasonable advanced notice cannot be used, and substantial prejudice that would result from the requirement of reasonable advanced notice." N.D.N.Y. L.R. 7.1(e). There is no indication in Plaintiff's papers that Defendants were served or given reasonable advanced notice of Plaintiff's request for injunctive relief as required by the standard motion procedure. Nor has Plaintiff filed an affidavit showing "good and sufficient cause why the standard motion procedure cannot be used" including any substantial prejudice that would result from compliance with the requirement. Finally, Plaintiff has not included a proposed order granting the requested injunctive relief. Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for a Temporary Restraining Order, Dkt. No. #1 , is DENIED without prejudice to refiling. Any refiling should comply with the applicable Rules, including (a) proof of service on all parties; (b) an affidavit showing (i) good cause why the standard motion procedure cannot be used; and (ii) if reasonable advanced notice is not possible, detailed and specific reasons why advanced notice cannot be used and the substantial prejudice that would result from providing reasonable advanced notice; and (c) a proposed order. SO ORDERED by U.S. District Judge Anne M. Nardacci on 6/7/2023. (Copy served upon pro se plaintiff by regular mail). (mab) |
| Filing 4 PRO SE HANDBOOK, LOCAL RULES, and NOTICE issued and explained to Sara-Judith: Yarbrough at time complaint was filed. (egr) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Frederick J. Akshar, Robert Voorhis. (Attachments: #1 Summons Issued as to Frederick J. Akshar)(egr) |
| Filing 2 G.O. 25 FILING ORDER ISSUED: Initial Conference set for 9/19/2023 at 11:00 AM in Binghamton before Magistrate Judge Miroslav Lovric. Civil Case Management Plan must be filed and Mandatory Disclosures are to be exchanged by the parties on or before 9/12/2023. (Pursuant to Local Rule 26.2, mandatory disclosures are to be exchanged among the parties but are NOT to be filed with the Court.) (egr) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION against Frederick J. Akshar, Louis P. Augostini, Scott D. Baker, Edward Beecher, Robert G. Behnke, Greg W. Bladwin, Broome County, New York, Joseph F. Cawley, Michael T. Decker, Stephen J. Flagg, Jason T. Garnar, Matthew J. Hilerbrant, Mary A. Kaminsky, Mel Manasse & Son, Erin V. Micha, Joseph A. Mihalko, Kim A. Myers, Judy Osborn, Matthew J. Pasquale, Daniel J. Reynolds, Susan Ryan, Jason E. Shaw, Town of Barker, New York, Robert Voorhis, Robert Weslar, Mark R. Whalen, Kelly F. Wildoner (Filing fee $402 receipt number 275U0NUR) filed by Sara-Judith: Yarbrough. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits to Complaint, #2 Note to the Complaint, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(egr) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
